ᐅ Planning a Single-Family Home for a Family of Four, West Münsterland Region, Initial Architect’s Draft

Hello everyone,

after some time spent on the selection of our plot in the new development area, we have now started the planning phase. We have found an architect, and a very first draft (without incorporating our feedback yet) has recently been presented to us. We would like to gather ideas and suggestions here.

Development Plan / Restrictions
Plot size: 456m² (rectangular, 20.7m wide and 22.0m long)
Slope: no, completely flat
Floor area ratio (FAR) for land use: 0.4
Floor space index (FSI): 0.8
Building envelope, building line, and boundary: 14m (46 feet) deep building envelope across the entire plot width
Edge development: ?
Number of parking spaces: space for 2 cars required
Number of storeys: 2 full storeys allowed (with shed or flat roof)
Roof type: with 2 full storeys a shed or flat roof is mandatory, with 1 full storey no restrictions
Architectural style: no restrictions
Orientation: no restrictions
Maximum heights/limits: base height max 0.5m (1.5 feet); eaves height max 6.5m (21 feet); ridge height max 11.0m (36 feet)
Further specifications: no dormers or roof protrusions allowed according to the development plan
Other: detailed information can easily be found online by searching "Bebauungsplan 8-23 Bocholt"

Homeowners’ Requirements
Style, roof type, building type: desired is a traditional brick-faced gable roof house typical for western Münsterland, with a fairly steep roof pitch. Construction as a solid masonry house.
Basement, storeys: built on a slab foundation without basement; living spaces planned either on ground floor and first floor or ground floor, first floor, and attic
Number of people, ages: 4 persons (38, 35, 5, 3)
Room needs on ground and first floors: living area (kitchen/dining/living), guest WC including small shower, master bedroom without separate dressing room, 2 children’s rooms, 1 office, 1 bathroom, sufficient storage space for everyday family needs
Office (family use or home office): 1 dedicated full-time home office used about 4 days/week
Overnight guests per year: very few, no guest room needed
Open or closed layout: middle ground
Conservative or modern design: middle ground
Open kitchen, kitchen island: kitchen tends to be open, possibly with slight visual separation
Number of dining seats: table for 6 persons
Fireplace: no
Music/sound system wall: TV to be located in the living area
Balcony, roof terrace: no
Garage, carport: garage desired for numerous bicycles, children’s vehicles, and other outdoor gear
Utility garden, greenhouse: no
Other wishes / special features / daily routine, also reasons why some things should or should not be included: the wish is for a classic single-family house for a family of four with fixed home office space. Not a "palace," but a house that functions well in everyday family life. The house should be realized as a "climate-friendly new build" (KFW300 without QNG).

About the House Design

Who created the design?
First draft by an independent architect (initial version, no details adjusted or feedback incorporated yet)

What do you particularly like? Why?

• The design fully covers our room program/specifications; all necessary rooms and sufficient storage space are included.
• Preferences such as the arrangement of kitchen/dining/living “around the corner” and similarly sized children’s rooms are included.
• The design as a gable roof house with two small gable projections (dormers/gables) is visually very appealing to us.

What do you not like? Why?

• Overall, the floor plan—especially the upper floor—does not appear efficient to us. The hallway area is clearly too large. The total living area is about 179m² (ground floor 94m² and upper floor 85m²), but it does not feel like that. For cost reasons alone, we aim for around 160m².
• The house is currently designed as 11m by 11m (36 by 36 feet) square, but we feel it should be stretched somewhat (e.g., 12m by 10m or similar) to better separate the kitchen and master bedroom. Probably the square shape was chosen to make the roof easier to develop.
• We suspect the current draft does not reach one full storey height yet (North Rhine-Westphalia: 3/4 rule) — adjustments to knee wall height and roof pitch may be necessary.
• Details need adjustment (e.g., remove pantry in kitchen to enlarge kitchen; doors; possibly add more roof windows; etc.).

Price estimate from the architect/designer: none yet
Personal price limit for the house including fittings: 650,000€ (house including ancillary costs, kitchen, garage, driveway/terrace)
Preferred heating technology: heat pump (possibly ground-source heat pump if trench collector is feasible, otherwise air-to-water heat pump)

What can you do without?
- can do without: excessive hallway areas, possibly the small gable projections (dormers)
- cannot do without: our room program including sufficient storage, window areas for plenty of natural light

Why does the design look the way it does now?
The design is based on our wishes/room program and generally meets them. The staircase could be extended up to the attic in the draft, but for this layout, a finished attic would not be needed for space or cost reasons. It would likely remain as an unfinished attic accessed by a folding ladder.

Final comments
After some further consideration, we see two options:

• Make the current design with the small dormers and room program on two floors more efficient and reduce it to about 160m². The attic would not be developed.
• Request an alternative design where the house is overall more compact and the attic is fully integrated (ground floor kitchen/dining/living, guest WC, utility room; first floor 2 children’s rooms, master bedroom, and bathroom; attic office and storage).

We look forward to your thoughts and input.

Best regards,
Malte

1) Why is the garage built on the west side? Just because it is drawn that way on the municipality’s “copy-paste” plan? I don’t see any restriction given the building lines for this lot arrangement.

2) Evening sun (northwest) is one of the nicest light settings for me—especially since people are usually at home and can enjoy it. I would NEVER orient utility rooms to the west.

3) The storage room on the upper floor seems a bit odd. Especially since there is plenty of space for a wardrobe along the wall next to the bedroom. A 242cm (95 inches) Pax wardrobe with a depth of 60cm (24 inches) over 4m (13 feet) easily replaces this small storage room, or a similar built-in wardrobe could work due to the roof slope. A spacious bathroom is also a nice feature.

4) The kitchen is not huge, so I would question whether separating the pantry really makes more sense than a better kitchen layout. Especially since the ground floor offers very generous utility rooms for a house of this size.

5) The window sizes and placement could also be reconsidered. It would probably feel too dark to me.

P.S.: This is a prefab house plan that has been adapted a bit to your ideas, right?

Isn’t it obvious?
The pantry... 4m² (43 sq ft) for just two cabinets at the far end of the room, otherwise just empty space. Nonsense, get rid of it, enlarge the kitchen, then you can easily fit 4 to 5 cabinets there.

The hallway upstairs is way too big, the bedroom could be extended all the way to the stairs. What else is supposed to happen "back there"? Just empty space.

The home office upstairs is too large, instead make the children's rooms bigger.

22m² (237 sq ft) for the utility room and storage? Far too big. Remove the utility room, make the living room bigger.
And do you know what you end up with? A typical floor plan pulled out of the drawer by every second general contractor 😉

They don’t exist, because they make no sense...

I understand what you mean. We have an 11 x 11 m (36 x 36 ft) layout, and it feels noticeably more spacious.

What always feels cramped is having a staircase right next to the entrance. Your pantry is almost impossible to furnish properly; just the access takes up nearly as much cabinet space as the architect planned.
There is a lot of hallway space on both floors, with a generous utility room and spacious technical room downstairs.
Upstairs, the hallway next to the stairs is unnecessary, and the storage room is basically just a closet.

Take a look at the many standard floor plans available online. They often suit the average needs. Think carefully about your specific requirements. Not just two children’s rooms or an office, but for example Grandma Hilde’s large farmhouse wardrobe with the dimensions xyz, or the need to store golf bags and other items in the cloakroom. Consider everything that sets your family apart and what matters to you. That should be included or at least taken into account.

Unfortunately, I don’t like anything about the floor plan.

On the ground floor, there are 3 rooms for utility, connections, storage, etc., totaling about 27 m² (290 ft²), plus a 16 m² (170 ft²) hallway with a staircase starting immediately next to the front door and a storage room that, if fully utilized, resembles a standard hallway.

These 43 m² (460 ft²) need to be reconsidered, along with the entire floor plan.

Regarding the upper floor... The children's rooms have narrow floor-to-ceiling windows and no other sources of light.

-Malte- schrieb:

Number of parking spaces: space for 2 cars required
Number of floors: 2 full floors allowed (for shed or flat roofs)
Roof type: for 2 full floors either shed or flat roof mandatory; no restrictions with 1 full floor
Architectural style: no restrictions
Orientation: no restrictions
Maximum heights/limits: base height max 0.5 m (1.6 ft); eaves height max 6.5 m (21 ft); ridge height max 11.0 m (36 ft)

Is that really the case? Because a ridge height of 11 m (36 ft) would also allow a two-story house with a pitched roof.

First of all, this was a rough draft based on which we discussed various aspects and possibilities. That explains features like the unusual storage room on the upper floor, the example pantry on the ground floor, or the (missing) windows. From my understanding, it was meant to explore whether this generally points in the right direction and to gather corresponding feedback from us.

Thanks for the initial feedback; I will try to address the points step by step.

RomeoZwo schrieb:

1) Why place the garage on the west side? Just because it is shown that way on the municipality’s “copy-paste” plan? I don’t see any restriction from the building lines regarding this lot arrangement.

2) Evening sun (northwest) is for me some of the nicest light—especially since people are usually home at that time and might want to enjoy it. I would NEVER orient utility rooms to the west.

3) The storage room on the upper floor seems odd. Especially since there is plenty of wall space towards the bedroom for a wardrobe. A 242cm (95 inches) PAX wardrobe with 60cm (24 inches) depth along 4m (13 feet) would easily replace this little storage room, or a similar built-in wardrobe adjusted for the sloped roof. A spacious bathroom is also a nice feature.

4) The kitchen isn’t very large; I would question whether the division towards the pantry really makes more sense than a better kitchen layout. Especially since the ground floor already has generous utility room space for a house of this size.

5) The window sizes and their arrangement could be reconsidered. It might be too dark for my taste.

P.S.: This is a prefabricated house plan adapted a bit to your ideas, right?

Garage on the west is due to the expected neighboring development, which will probably block the light early, and especially the federal highway running west of the building area.

MachsSelbst schrieb:

Isn’t it obvious? The pantry... 4m² (43 square feet) with just two cupboards at the far end of the room, otherwise empty space. Nonsense, get rid of it, enlarge the kitchen, then you easily have space for 4 to 5 cupboards.

The hallway upstairs is way too large; the bedroom could be extended up to the stairs. What's supposed to happen “in the back” otherwise? Just empty space.

The study upstairs is too large; instead, the kids’ rooms should be bigger.

22m² (237 square feet) for the utility and storage room? Way too big. Remove the utility room and enlarge the living room.
And you know what you get then? A standard layout that comes out of any second general contractor’s drawer 😉

Those don’t exist because they are so illogical...

Technical question: Is it possible to enlarge the bedroom on the upper floor with a layout like this, where the load-bearing walls on the ground and upper floors don’t line up? Otherwise, this could be done by slightly widening the overall house dimensions.

haydee schrieb:

I understand what you mean. We have 11x11m (36x36 feet), and it feels much more spacious.

What always feels cramped is a staircase immediately next to the entrance. Your pantry is hardly usable: the access alone takes up almost the cabinet space drawn by the architect.
There’s a lot of hallway space on both floors, a generous utility room downstairs, and spacious technical room.
Upstairs, the hallway next to the stairs is unnecessary; the storage room is basically a closet.

Look at many standard floor plans online—they often work well for the average household. Think carefully about your specific needs—not just two kids’ rooms, study, etc., but also Grandma Hilde’s big cupboard with dimensions xyz, in the wardrobe the golf bag has to fit, and so on. All those things that might differentiate your family from others and are important to you. That should, or rather must, be included.

Correct, I also see many problem areas here that a standard floor plan tends to cover. A floor plan similar in house type and layout, in my opinion, is the "Kern-Haus Aura," which fits this on 9.6m x 12.6m (31.5 feet x 41 feet) with a total of 159m² (1710 square feet).

kbt09 schrieb:

Unfortunately, I don’t like the floor plan at all.

On the ground floor, there are three rooms allocated for utility, connections, storage, etc., adding up to about 27m² (290 square feet), plus 16m² (172 square feet) of hall with a staircase starting right next to the front door, and a storage room that, when used properly, looks like a standard hallway.

These 43m² (463 square feet) need to be reassessed, which means the entire floor plan must be redone.

Regarding the upper floor... The children’s rooms have narrow floor-to-ceiling windows and otherwise no natural light.

Is that really the case? Because a ridge height of 11m (36 feet) would also allow two stories with a pitched roof.

The restriction in the development plan is actually really frustrating—I have no idea what the planners had in mind. Two stories are only allowed with a flat roof or a shed roof with a pitch between 22 and 30 degrees. Other roof types are only permitted as single-story. I inquired about this explicitly with the city. I will attach excerpts from the development plan.

Best regards,
Malte