ᐅ General Floor Plan Discussion / Situation of the Staircase to the Attic / Dormers
Created on: 25 Mar 2026 13:35
P
phibe1005P
phibe100525 Mar 2026 13:35Hello everyone,
based on a user’s suggestion, I would like to share our current planning status. We are currently struggling with the situation regarding the dormers and the staircase to the attic. But first, here are all the key details according to the questionnaire.
Development plan / restrictions
Lower Saxony, Emsland district
approximately 342.2 sqm (3,683 sq ft)
no slope on the site
approximately 130 sqm (1,399 sq ft) of living space
two full floors plus attic
terrace house construction, therefore direct building boundary alignment
1 parking space under the carport, one in front of the carport
gable roof with a 45-degree pitch
orientation according to plan
eaves height 6 - 6.5 m (20 - 21 feet)
floor height 10 m (33 feet)
top edge of the finished floor level of the ground floor at a height of at least 20.00 m above sea level (NHN)
Owners’ requirements
terrace house
about 130 sqm (1,399 sq ft)
open-plan living-dining area with kitchen, one office/guest room, master bedroom, one child’s room, utility room, guest toilet without shower
family with one child, a second child planned for the future
if the second child is born, we would partially convert the attic to create an additional room
occasional overnight guests (sofa bed in the office)
open kitchen
number of dining seats: 6
no fireplace
no music or stereo wall
no balcony or roof terrace
carport
House design
Who designed the plan:
- planner from a regional builder who delivers turnkey homes
What do you particularly like? Why?
--> The plot / terrace house development does not allow for too much flexibility. The house’s shape is therefore simple, which we like. We want about 130 sqm (1,399 sq ft) of living space. That was the requirement.
What do you not like? Why?
Price estimate according to architect/planner: 385,000 based on the standard construction description with fully finished attic (which is not planned for now, but nevertheless included in the price), EXCLUDING carport, exterior landscaping, painting, flooring, kitchen, photovoltaic system, and controlled mechanical ventilation
We don’t like the two dormers. They are currently necessary due to the height situation of the staircase.
Also, it does not have to be a full concrete staircase. We would like to use the attic for a second child’s room or an office in the future. Otherwise, it should serve as storage space. Therefore, we can imagine a space-saving staircase. However, we are missing ideas on how to solve this.
Budget expectations: We want to save as much as possible.
preferred heating system: air-source heat pump with underfloor heating
If you have to give up something, which details/extensions
- can you give up: full staircase to the attic
- cannot give up: conversion option for the attic
Thank you very much for your feedback and ideas on how to improve the situation for the staircase access to the attic.
based on a user’s suggestion, I would like to share our current planning status. We are currently struggling with the situation regarding the dormers and the staircase to the attic. But first, here are all the key details according to the questionnaire.
Development plan / restrictions
Lower Saxony, Emsland district
approximately 342.2 sqm (3,683 sq ft)
no slope on the site
approximately 130 sqm (1,399 sq ft) of living space
two full floors plus attic
terrace house construction, therefore direct building boundary alignment
1 parking space under the carport, one in front of the carport
gable roof with a 45-degree pitch
orientation according to plan
eaves height 6 - 6.5 m (20 - 21 feet)
floor height 10 m (33 feet)
top edge of the finished floor level of the ground floor at a height of at least 20.00 m above sea level (NHN)
Owners’ requirements
terrace house
about 130 sqm (1,399 sq ft)
open-plan living-dining area with kitchen, one office/guest room, master bedroom, one child’s room, utility room, guest toilet without shower
family with one child, a second child planned for the future
if the second child is born, we would partially convert the attic to create an additional room
occasional overnight guests (sofa bed in the office)
open kitchen
number of dining seats: 6
no fireplace
no music or stereo wall
no balcony or roof terrace
carport
House design
Who designed the plan:
- planner from a regional builder who delivers turnkey homes
What do you particularly like? Why?
--> The plot / terrace house development does not allow for too much flexibility. The house’s shape is therefore simple, which we like. We want about 130 sqm (1,399 sq ft) of living space. That was the requirement.
What do you not like? Why?
Price estimate according to architect/planner: 385,000 based on the standard construction description with fully finished attic (which is not planned for now, but nevertheless included in the price), EXCLUDING carport, exterior landscaping, painting, flooring, kitchen, photovoltaic system, and controlled mechanical ventilation
We don’t like the two dormers. They are currently necessary due to the height situation of the staircase.
Also, it does not have to be a full concrete staircase. We would like to use the attic for a second child’s room or an office in the future. Otherwise, it should serve as storage space. Therefore, we can imagine a space-saving staircase. However, we are missing ideas on how to solve this.
Budget expectations: We want to save as much as possible.
preferred heating system: air-source heat pump with underfloor heating
If you have to give up something, which details/extensions
- can you give up: full staircase to the attic
- cannot give up: conversion option for the attic
Thank you very much for your feedback and ideas on how to improve the situation for the staircase access to the attic.
H
hanghaus202325 Mar 2026 13:54What does the zoning plan say about roof extensions?
Third or fourth gable?
Third or fourth gable?
P
phibe100525 Mar 2026 14:54hanghaus2023 schrieb:
13 No restrictions known.
phibe1005 schrieb:
Standard building specification with a fully finished attic (which is not planned for now Yes, but since you are responsible for the floors and walls anyway, it relates to the technical requirements. It’s not a bad idea at all. Additionally, the approval as living space is then guaranteed and included in the permit. Later on, you’ll be glad you don’t have to redo the interior finishing.
Emsland is, I assume, like northern Lower Saxony in general, a relatively affordable building area.
Regarding the staircase in general: it is also possible to move it further forward on the ground floor, as I already suggested in the other thread.
Is it allowed for the storage/cold room to be built over?
Personally, I find the design too plain. The hallway (entrance area) is relatively large and doesn’t add much value. Do you really need the side door in the utility room? Ultimately, laundry is done there, and you don’t need to walk through that room with street shoes, at least not as an entrance or extended hallway if there is already a hallway with an entry door planned.
Based on the questionnaire, you haven’t revealed much about yourselves. Assuming the planned family expansion is still far off, I guess you are quite young.
Do you have any other requirements besides a simple square meter size? It doesn’t have to be a particular daily routine, but hobbies, needs for personal space in the house?
First, I would rotate the staircase, shorten the hallway, and possibly relocate the utility room to the other side.
phibe1005 schrieb:
Standard construction description with a fully finished attic (which is not planned for now Yes, but since you are responsible for the floors and walls anyway, it concerns the technical requirements. It's not a bad idea. Additionally, the approval as living space is then ensured and included in the building permit / planning permission. Later on, you will be glad not to have to redo the interior finishing.
I assume Emsland, like northern Lower Saxony in general, is a fairly affordable area for building.
Regarding the staircase in general: it is also possible on the ground floor to move it further forward, as I already suggested in the other thread.
Is it allowed for the cold storage room to be built over?
Personally, I find the design too plain. The hallway is comparatively large but not very functional. Is the side door in the utility room really necessary? Ultimately, laundry will be done there, so you shouldn’t have to walk through this room with outdoor shoes, at least not use it as an entrance or extended hallway if there is already a hallway with an entrance door planned.
Unfortunately, the questionnaire reveals nothing about you. I assume, due to the planned family expansion in the more distant future, that you are still quite young.
Do you have no other requirements beyond a simple square meter size? There doesn’t have to be a special daily routine, but what about hobbies or the need for personal space and freedom in the house?
The first thing I would do is rotate the staircase, shorten the hallway, and possibly move the utility room to the other side.
I see a completely awkwardly planned house and suspect that the general contractor just pulled it from their usual "comfortable" drawer and simply made it half a meter longer.
To be honest: I wouldn’t change a thing here, but rather throw the entire design in the trash. If a 130m² (1400 sq ft) house actually meets your needs – which I think is perfectly reasonable – then build a consistent 130m² (1400 sq ft) house instead of turning a nearly 160m² (1700 sq ft) house into a living room area budget wasted on exaggerated fortress-like walls (is EH40 required here, for which builders often only come up with brute force solutions?).
Here, an actually appropriate home (living space category "modest plus") is overloaded with thick exterior walls and a generous attic used as extra storage. The stair position would be exactly right for a house of this width if – yes, if! – the ridge position of the secondary ridge matched the main ridge.
Besides this design flaw, nothing forces the first transverse gable, and the second is just for symmetry sake. It would be helpful to know the age of child 1 (K1) and at what interval you plan to add child 2 (K2). Unless you are already at an age where there is a "risk" that K2 could turn into child 2 or even 3 due to fertility treatments, I see your space reserves as far too generous. The originally reasonable sizing of the living space expectations is here repeatedly and generously overcompensated: with wasted space on fortress-like walls and a wholesale surplus of reserved rooms, especially in the attic storage area on top.
Is the general contractor also the building contractor here, supplying the entire row of linked houses with their builds?
Take a look at the standard semi-detached house model from the “usual suspects,” which is two meters or more wider (okay, almost two meters if you calculate it with normal exterior walls), about one meter longer, and offers around 140–145m² (1500–1560 sq ft) over two straight-floor stories plus an SD35 roof. It has a completely different staircase, but the one shown here isn’t noticeably more comfortable and offers a (relatively and absolutely!) significantly better use of the expensive footprint.
If you like a simple form, then build one. This one—with what I’d call a cross-hipped roof—is anything but cheap or simple; it’s inefficiently complicated (a lot of construction cost without any perceived architectural value, just expensive with no benefit).
If possible, send both the design and the contractor packing!
By the way, you’re not the first to build linked houses here; the closest similar case is probably @Mbk84, see [links].
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
To be honest: I wouldn’t change a thing here, but rather throw the entire design in the trash. If a 130m² (1400 sq ft) house actually meets your needs – which I think is perfectly reasonable – then build a consistent 130m² (1400 sq ft) house instead of turning a nearly 160m² (1700 sq ft) house into a living room area budget wasted on exaggerated fortress-like walls (is EH40 required here, for which builders often only come up with brute force solutions?).
Here, an actually appropriate home (living space category "modest plus") is overloaded with thick exterior walls and a generous attic used as extra storage. The stair position would be exactly right for a house of this width if – yes, if! – the ridge position of the secondary ridge matched the main ridge.
phibe1005 schrieb:
We don’t like the two dormers. They are currently needed for the stair height situation. Also, it doesn’t have to be a full concrete staircase. The attic is planned to be used in the future as a second child’s bedroom or an office. Otherwise, it will be used as storage. Therefore, we could imagine a space-saving staircase. But we lack ideas on how to solve this.
Besides this design flaw, nothing forces the first transverse gable, and the second is just for symmetry sake. It would be helpful to know the age of child 1 (K1) and at what interval you plan to add child 2 (K2). Unless you are already at an age where there is a "risk" that K2 could turn into child 2 or even 3 due to fertility treatments, I see your space reserves as far too generous. The originally reasonable sizing of the living space expectations is here repeatedly and generously overcompensated: with wasted space on fortress-like walls and a wholesale surplus of reserved rooms, especially in the attic storage area on top.
Is the general contractor also the building contractor here, supplying the entire row of linked houses with their builds?
Take a look at the standard semi-detached house model from the “usual suspects,” which is two meters or more wider (okay, almost two meters if you calculate it with normal exterior walls), about one meter longer, and offers around 140–145m² (1500–1560 sq ft) over two straight-floor stories plus an SD35 roof. It has a completely different staircase, but the one shown here isn’t noticeably more comfortable and offers a (relatively and absolutely!) significantly better use of the expensive footprint.
phibe1005 schrieb:
The house shape is simple, which we like.
If you like a simple form, then build one. This one—with what I’d call a cross-hipped roof—is anything but cheap or simple; it’s inefficiently complicated (a lot of construction cost without any perceived architectural value, just expensive with no benefit).
If possible, send both the design and the contractor packing!
By the way, you’re not the first to build linked houses here; the closest similar case is probably @Mbk84, see [links].
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
Similar topics