I’m not quite sure. An architect-designed house is generally imagined as a house that stands out due to particularly planned spatial arrangements, design elements, or special design.
If you build such a house and then only have 18 or 15 sqm left for the bedrooms, then that is too little.
Way too small. I would build bigger.
Was that a question now? The former counts. Not the size.
If you also have money, then you can also go for the size.
Construction method – modern design, clear and reduced shapes with interesting accents, targeted breaks that give the house something unobtrusively unique (facade, materials, …).
Before I get to the budgeting, I’ll ask my questions that haven’t been asked so far and can’t be clearly explained or answered through the drawing or explanation.
The orientation is great and we have a beautiful distant view.
To the east, a large part is undevelopable or possibly usable for outbuildings. The access should be via this area.
Where is north? What orientation does the house or living room itself have? Access through the east… the house or the property? Does the garage then face south or east? The driveway looks like it is in the south?
My question about the street…
Oh Lord, give me a street :D where do I have to look?
…does not come out of nowhere and unfortunately was not answered. Your "site plan" is an elevation plan and very confusing. Furthermore, the planting is confusing. The drawn rectangles (buildings?) do not represent the building structure. There are no dimensions at all, at least not for walls, which still makes the assessment difficult. In the 3D animation: what is that gray cuboid on the left?
People – 2 in their prime age and 2 dogs
How old are you? "In their prime" could mean from 30 to 75… but I still find a different approach to building with mid-50s than with mid-70s. I struggle with this house that is supposed to be barrier-free…!
My actual question was whether there are ideas & suggestions for improvement for the floor plan or if you notice any faulty thinking. That would really help. We already have our budget in mind.
But for that, you need some information. At least wall dimensions are the minimum to assess whether the dining area can be halved.
When I see the draft, I see no neighbors! One might rather think of a forest plot in a solitary location… What does the neighboring development look like? Are they allowed or supposed to look inside or should the glass be reflective/mirrored?
A very large house, planned by an architect, at least the planner has some creativity and plays with design aspects, that impresses at first.
Then the title of 200 sqm, 2 persons "best agers" etc.… you already know that you don’t have to pay attention to being "child- or family-friendly". That brings creative freedom.
…Unfortunately not within the budget.
200 sqm cost in a simple construction _without_ bay windows and frills, _without_ large spans that make the statics for ceiling and windows more expensive, simple plaster facade _without_ expensive projections that require costly roof waterproofing and certainly _without_ a support construction of a room that then practically floats in the air… roughly, currently estimated, €600,000. A buffer is advisable in today’s times. Possibly one can manage with a €50,000 buffer (mind you: simple house shape, plain execution).
It’s not that we all have bad or cheap taste just because we have a plaster facade and a simple house shape, but because even our wallets are limited.
Therefore the idea to solve the living area partly "floating" on the upper floor with terrace and access down to the garden.
Examples: Fixed glazing instead of many sliding doors, poured asphalt floors, corrugated metal facade, polycarbonate panels, geothermal coils… And yes, as Katja already wrote, maybe also get a bit smaller.
I don’t see that working with these wishes. When I was a young 30, I dealt with low budget: corrugated metal roof, building without window sills, pipes on concrete, concrete floors… it wasn’t cheaper then (excluding own labor) and it is even less cheap today, because reductions today are design, and design is really expensive (even if it doesn’t have to be). These are not designer shoes you can buy around the corner.
Your fixed panoramic glazing on the upper floor already costs a small world trip in transportation, plus the statics to be tricked here that swallow huge sums on this house…
Fixed glazing in the attic requires balconies and overhangs… those don’t come free. Slope…
Glass railings on the terraces: is supposed to be avoided. Then get the house designed with "cheap" grids and some support beams for prefabricated construction in the open space and then see if this is still the house you want to build. And with all the floating statics, expensive floor coverings, large window fronts, 3 long stylish stairs, other frills like fireplace, and then energy efficiency (heat coming in through windows, going out with the air conditioner, insulation of free floors and roofs as in the living room) I would add at least 30% on top plus another €100,000 for a buffer. That was also seen similarly by others who can estimate better than I can.
My actual question was whether there are ideas & suggestions for improvement for the floor plan or if you notice any faulty thinking.
What weaknesses do you see?
Faulty thinking 1 is the budget… where should one start with a dream house if it is not just going to remain a dream? Closing your eyes doesn’t help here.
The many pure "that will never work" comments unfortunately don’t help me…
Then tell us what you can do without. Because you haven’t answered that question.
If you have to forego, which details/fit-outs can you do without:
Faulty thinking 2:
Direct access from the ground floor to the garden is not so important to us.
The house shall be barrier-free.
That includes the bathtub ;)
Faulty thinking 3
Biotope close to the terrace
Keeps away mosquitoes and loud frogs ;)
No, seriously: is a house barrier-free if an elevator is installed? The toilets and the dressing room certainly are not.
Regarding the floor plan:
Hallway over 15 sqm, sauna without flora, relaxing amidst files… was already mentioned.
Kitchen is a real challenge. If the planned enlargement of the bathroom upstairs is implemented, then probably nobody would like to use the toilet there. Because one would have a line of sight to the kitchen.
Living/dining is already huge. Do you really want that? Fireplace… why is it there and has no chimney?????
And Katja already noticed: terribly long corridors for 2 people… you can’t even get to the door when the gardener rings… others are already long gone when you reach the door. A video intercom is worth it for having contact.
If the bedrooms are only for one person, for example, they could also be used as an office or reduced. Or sauna upstairs.
Or both bedrooms with bathroom and sauna in the basement, a guest area on the ground floor… I would probably try to reduce the house by one floor.
Shortening the dining area by about 3 meters of length so that nice rooms remain upstairs would also be possible, but still there would be 3 floors… definitely at least one too many for a best-ager.