Changes cost an absolute bomb so consider your modifications carefully Joy. Looking at both plans you've not altered the design much rather you've moved rooms around whilst trying to retain the original content. Some rooms appear less usable as a result. The #2/bed/study is one, seems too small, even the guest bed seems smaller and it didn't appear large to begin with. Without room dimensions it's a bit tougher to make comments however. I wonder why you made the guest bathroom a powder room given the location is such that it won't be used as frequently as the bathroom off the main living area? Sure put the doorway into the guest room so the bathroom can service the bed/study too but don't lose the shower up there. Nothing worse for guests than having to pad through the main living area in their pj's to the shower or worse with a towel wrapped around their middles on the return trip to get dressed. It's enough to put some off their cornflakes! I'd seriously rethink some of those changes Joy they will cost you a lot with little gain methinks. I'm sorry to sour the mood I know it's an exciting time but I'd hate to see you make expensive and possibly unnecessary decisions.

Great house design! I️ like the arches in the drawing rather than the 3D render however I️ don’t think that’s the only thing going on. The staircase leading up to it looks really heavy and narrow. I️ feel like the house is getting squeezed and it’s holding its breath! The rest of the design is clearly anchored into the site but the combo of tight rigid staircase, high arches and the vertical exposed bricks mean the front is out of proportion. Maybe make sure the arches are “wider” as per the drawing and perhaps the staircase walls are timber like the rest and I️ think the squeeze effect I️ see will be relaxed. I️ really hope this makes sense because when I️ read it back it sounds mad!

In addition to the above comments, here are a couple as well. Remove upstairs balcony, waste of money will rarely be used. I'd also have concerns of children climbing/falling off/etc. Remove sitting as its (almost) impossible to furnish and will just be a circulation area. I doubt it would be used even if designed perfectly, theres better places to be such as downstairs, over looking pool....etc.... Get 3/4 bedrooms upstairs instead of the sitting area/balcony. I'd also get another full size bathroom upstairs and reduce the downstairs to a powder room with a shower only. Make proposed down stairs bed 3 the lounge and shuffle the pantry kitchen area up into where the proposed lounge is now. That will allow the living/dining to also shuffle up saving floor area. Sitting and study is ok as is garage. Relocate laundry to perhaps be between pantry and powder room spaces. You'll need a proper Laundry close the household. oklouise's plan downstairs is quite good too. Have a look at 'evermore.co' they have a great website and some inspirational pictures. The current plan would be quite an expensive job and upstairs a bit ordinary as well. I'm not familiar with Toowoomba council regulations nor your budget/requirements. To have a cottage in Queensland is a great starting point. Thats the stuff dreams are made of!

As mentioned previously, the balustrade and safety barrier regulations exist for good reason, ultimately to prevent accidental loss of life. No equal counter argument, period. Are they overly restrictive? Not necessarily. Are they tighter than other countries? Definitely. Can we vary them? Sometimes, if you can prove compliance to the deemed to satisfy provisions. Can we achieve the same aesthetically clean "no barrier" designs in Australia as simply and to the same degree as in other countries? No. But these more restrictive conditions don't necessarily equate to more restrictive architecture. Arguably we have to work harder and be more creative within constraints to get what I'd describe as quality and clever architectural solutions, but you know what? Too bad. And this is what separates "the men from the boys" so to speak (no gender inequality meant at all) I thrive on the creative opportunity within the constraint and it challenges our professional to go deeper creatively using the breadth of of skills to achieve results in arguably more challenging conditions. Its an easy cop out just to whinge about safety barriers or whatever the particular restriction is based on predominantly aesthetic/visual/spatial goals. Design solutions will ultimately reflect/respond to the contextual conditions. Yes outside of Australia there is less regulation around matters of safety that can be exploited by design solutions to sometimes achieve visually and spatially breathtaking results, such as in the images shown on this post. Like in all situations it's about balance and priorities and when practicing design and architecture in this country issues around safety are managed more robustly by regulation, which in turn naturally requires design solutions to work within the limits, which in many cases, due to the particular project priority stack and/or capacity of the people involved, results in less "integrated" solutions. At the end of the day, quality architecture is important and there's not enough of it here IMO, but that aside, safety barriers won't and don't prevent great or interesting architecture, but they do reduce/minimise loss of life, particularly young life, and that there I think for any project regardless should be the absolute highest priority, above and beyond any potential aesthetic or spatial outcome.