Click here for the two options Naomi suggests

THE DILEMMA: Joan Saywood’s house was built in the 1930s. A side extension was added in the 1980s, increasing the ground floor area by approximately 30 per cent to create a utility room and a dining room.

Joan’s problem is that the dining room is very dark and can be reached only through the sitting room, meaning that dinner-party dishes take an unnecessarily circuitous route to and from the kitchen. The kitchen is also smaller than the utility room, which creates a frustrating imbalance: the Saywoods’ custom of eating together at the kitchen table is a tight squeeze now that the children are in their teens.

How can Joan remodel her ground floor to give the family a decent-sized kitchen, retain a small utility room and make the dining room brighter and directly accessible from the kitchen?

THE SOLUTION: I love 1930s homes: they are reassuringly solid and their scale, detailing and finish all contribute to a cosy domesticity that is not always as valued as it should be, resulting in some very poorly designed additions, as well as row upon row of fake stained-glass uPVC windows that blight the commuter belt.

In Joan’s case, I can see why she has struggled to come up with a solution: although the dining room is dark, there are quite a few windows in tricky places along the perimeter, meaning that wall-mounted kitchen cabinets can be located in a limited number of places.

While working on Joan’s plans, I wondered to what extent the family use the utility room. So I have come up with two solutions, one more radical than the other, with one utility space larger than the other. I haven’t been able to take into account Joan’s preferences because kitchens are such personal spaces, but the following should get her on the right track.

The less radical solution involves removing a proportion of the wall between the kitchen and utility room; the remaining portion of the wall would contain a “utility cupboard” against which would be fitted a “peninsula” (an island unit fixed on one side), featuring the oven, hob and, above, an extractor. Inside the utility cupboard, a separate washer and dryer could be stacked on top of each other, alongside some storage space for an ironing board, mops and vacuum cleaner with some shelves for cleaning products. As there is a sink here already, plumbing will not be an issue. And locating the cupboard door next to the back door will mean that laundry doesn’t have to travel too far before it’s hung up to dry on a line outside.

If Joan wanted more storage, floor-mounted units could be added to the bay in the existing kitchen. In this layout, the kitchen table could then be located alongside the peninsula. I would then suggest inserting glazed sliding double doors between the dining room and the new kitchen-dining zone, flooding the dining room with light as well as connecting it to the kitchen.

The more radical plan is to swap round the existing kitchen and dining room and knock through between the existing utility and dining room. This would create a large eat-in kitchen opening on to the garden – French doors here would substantially enhance either scheme – with the utility room along a windowless elevation. There would be a bit of jiggery-pokery required in terms of plumbing, and the services of a structural engineer would doubtless be required to supervise the removal of walls.

However, I think that this plan could work beautifully, especially with the sitting room now contained and the dining room located in a room with a comparatively large amount of glazing to allow light to flood into the space.

For more inspirational makeover advice from Naomi Cleaver, go to: timesonline.co.uk/interiors

Times recommends

• Second homes: credit crunch casualty or money-spinner?
• How I built my own sliding house
• Top 10 incentives for house buyers