Single-family house, approximately 160m², Bauhaus style; first draft according to our wishes

That is quite an interesting post. You like them, but don’t want to have one yourself. May I ask why? What I notice is that these building types significantly influence or make the rooms difficult to design.

Such a thing exists: you don’t have to have everything you find good. I like the cube style – but since I had my terrace years before a two-story house, I know that I don’t want something like that anymore. The house somehow seems to be on you. With the overhang it will be the same for me. But some are more sensitive than others.

If we rotate the living room furniture by 90 degrees, the entertainment center would be in the middle of the hallway. That would also be a bit dumb, or am I wrong?

No idea what you consider a hallway. Basically, your living room is a living hallway.

What do you mean by the ‘impossible furnishing’ in the bathroom? That you face the toilet directly when entering the bathroom?

For example, the bathtub doesn’t provide anything calming. And you want to relax in it, after all.

We don’t understand. Can you give us examples here?

I wouldn’t plan a children’s room under 3 meters in a new build. At least not if there are only two. With three children’s rooms you have to compromise, but with a conventional number of rooms certain dimensions should be right.
The walk-in closet is too narrow. With two wardrobes, there is only a 75 cm aisle... the walk-in closet is realistically only 5 sqm in size...
I wrote that I like the design. However, I don’t have children anymore in the house. Therefore, one should rather look at the criticism with me than at the word “like.”
The fact is: the location of the stairs messes up quite a bit. It takes away spaciousness (okay, cozy living rooms are often desired), but that doesn’t exist here either. Rather the opposite. That is the biggest disadvantage for me.
Maybe the stairs should be rotated 90 degrees clockwise and living room and kitchen swapped. That would make more sense to the entrance in my opinion.

I would probably avoid the staircase altogether and start anew. Too many weak points in the rooms. I have the feeling the architect is desperately trying to be original from the outside. I usually find that rather unoriginal.

Maybe one should simply close off the hallway to the living room. However, the staircase also takes up a lot of square meters... Kitchen/dining is too long, other rooms suffer again. 10 sqm for 4 people, where the toilet visit collides with a washbasin candidate, or vice versa... is not so great.

We are eagerly awaiting your feedback!

Well.

I have the feeling the architect is desperately trying to be original from the outside. I usually find that rather unoriginal.

And so on. Unfortunately, there is not much more to say; most of my criticism has already been expressed here. The twisting of the floors strikes me as a failed attempt to distract from the fact that the plan has nothing endearing about it. Is this even an architect who came up with this? — I ask because it does happen that someone values the dining area more than the living area — but architecturally, in terms of the “body language of the rooms,” there is no living room here at all, but rather a visitor waiting area (waiting for whom or what?) at the end of the hallway: entryway, WC, waiting room. What is missing is the reception desk. Then the house is built on a mound — now explained by groundwater — but: apart from the strange appearance (with the twisting that adds one plasticality level too many), this does not apply to the garage (and the basement!), does it? — and it remains somewhat Frisian, so a bit crazy in the context of southern Baden (and Hornbach style). To sum up: floor plans whose “why like this and not otherwise” is not comprehensible # craftsmanship weaknesses in the room arrangement # mismatched floors arranged as if that were the Paris fashion now # garnished with a topography à la overdrawn eyebrows. Sorry, this looks not only like “civil engineer instead of architect,” but also like provincial chic. However, the main reason I advise starting completely anew is not this null intersection with my taste — that would not be a reason on the objective level — but a highly banal yet all the more devastating realization: If you put a straight single-flight staircase in the center — which inevitably grants it dominance — then it is not a cosmetic but a central snag if it has the wrong direction of ascent. That means you cannot simply rotate it, but unfortunately need a fundamental reengineering.

Good morning,

First of all, thank you very much for the detailed feedback. I will go through it again in detail this evening / pass it on to the architect. There is still hope for the "cube design". Since this is quite sobering for the architect and us: can you recommend floor plans / houses in Bauhaus design that you would say: "Wow! This is a benchmark"?

Thanks and regards

There is basically nothing against not building in shoebox format but working with recesses, etc. In this case, however, it is neither particularly successful from the outside nor inside. You can loosen up the shoebox in many ways. Materials on the facade, recesses/small roof terrace. Accents with modern, light clinker bricks. Or shoebox with a kind of bay window on the upper floor, which is clad with Aludibond and thus becomes interesting again. It looks less technical with wood in combination and a lighter gray instead of anthracite. or or or.

In NRW, I could name 2-3 building areas where you could get inspiration. Where are you from?