ᐅ Planning a Single-Family Home for a Family of Four, West Münsterland Region, Initial Architect’s Draft
Created on: 20 Oct 2025 12:17
-
-Malte-
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?
What do you not like? Why?
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:
We look forward to your thoughts and input.
Best regards,
Malte
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
ypg schrieb:
The light switch next to the stairs. Whether recessed or with a slight protrusion. It is minimal and barely noticeable. Will it be next to the stairs or in the hallway? I think the hallway will benefit from having more space, while the rooms themselves won’t be affected.
I would see the following advantages:
The light switch next to the stairs is of course a topic, although I don’t yet know if we will need one there (use of occupancy sensors). However, I completely understand that the current plan makes the hallway a bit more spacious, and maybe we shouldn’t try to optimize for every last centimeter here either 😉
- Child 2: no more offset in the wall toward the stairs, which currently makes it difficult to place shelves or cabinets along that wall
- Parents: the door could definitely open in front of the wardrobe thanks to the extra centimeters gained. According to the drawings, it works currently as well, but since these are rough construction dimensions, I am a bit skeptical.
The light switch next to the stairs is of course a topic, although I don’t yet know if we will need one there (use of occupancy sensors). However, I completely understand that the current plan makes the hallway a bit more spacious, and maybe we shouldn’t try to optimize for every last centimeter here either 😉
I have another question regarding the planned sliding door between the hallway and the open-plan living area.
In our current house, we have no way to close off the living/dining room from the hallway, which regularly bothers us in the evenings. Nonetheless, the opening from the open-plan area to the hallway should be designed generously and usually remain open, only being closed in the evening when needed. So far, the opening is designed at 1.51 m (5 feet), but we are not yet sure what kind of door would suit this. To avoid the door panels getting in the way, a sliding door seems to be the only option from our point of view. A double door, as currently indicated, wouldn’t really work because the panel facing the living area would be too long for the wall.
There are many ways to design this, and we haven’t found a clear overview yet. A door recessed inside the wall is probably not possible due to the load-bearing wall, and a drywall pocket frame is also not an option for the wall design. So most likely, it will be a standard sliding door running on a track in the open-plan area. The door itself can be designed in various ways (double door, single door combined with a fixed panel, etc.).
I think we definitely need to reduce the width of the opening, but what size would be practical? I haven’t been able to find out if there are any standard sizes or if these are mostly custom-made. Currently, I’m considering whether reducing the opening to 1.26 m (4 feet 2 inches) would make sense. Ideally, we would have the option to install something affordable off-the-shelf if the budget later doesn’t allow for a custom-made dream loft door.
In our current house, we have no way to close off the living/dining room from the hallway, which regularly bothers us in the evenings. Nonetheless, the opening from the open-plan area to the hallway should be designed generously and usually remain open, only being closed in the evening when needed. So far, the opening is designed at 1.51 m (5 feet), but we are not yet sure what kind of door would suit this. To avoid the door panels getting in the way, a sliding door seems to be the only option from our point of view. A double door, as currently indicated, wouldn’t really work because the panel facing the living area would be too long for the wall.
There are many ways to design this, and we haven’t found a clear overview yet. A door recessed inside the wall is probably not possible due to the load-bearing wall, and a drywall pocket frame is also not an option for the wall design. So most likely, it will be a standard sliding door running on a track in the open-plan area. The door itself can be designed in various ways (double door, single door combined with a fixed panel, etc.).
I think we definitely need to reduce the width of the opening, but what size would be practical? I haven’t been able to find out if there are any standard sizes or if these are mostly custom-made. Currently, I’m considering whether reducing the opening to 1.26 m (4 feet 2 inches) would make sense. Ideally, we would have the option to install something affordable off-the-shelf if the budget later doesn’t allow for a custom-made dream loft door.
I see no problem or need for changes. Keep the opening at 151cm (59 inches), use a main leaf in the form of a standard 88.5cm (35-inch) door, and have it open into an occasional leaf, which is glazed and also brightens the hallway. This solution is not affected by the fact that there actually was no problem to begin with.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
Okay, clearly I was a bit slow here. All the interior doors in our house are positioned directly next to a wall, so I hadn’t realized that standard hinged doors can usually open well beyond 90°. That obviously makes things much easier, and we don’t actually need a sliding door. We’ll keep the rough opening size at 151cm (60 inches) and can later decide, depending on the budget, which option with a fixed panel makes the most sense.
Similar topics