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
Thank you. Glad you like it. That motivates me to keep going.
Your comments are very thoughtful and helpful. You really think things through.
Yes, I agree with that. The cloakroom is naturally better placed by the door, and the bathroom is better near the stairs since the door won’t be right in the dirt zone, and the path from the bedroom to the second toilet is shorter. Lighting-wise, it shouldn’t make a difference because you can have a nice window in the stairwell.
You don’t need a complicated pantry. You have above-average space for tall cabinets in this spacious kitchen, so you can do without a fancy pantry that restricts you. Raclette or fondue sets can go into the utility room; you don’t need a pantry for that. Beverage crates can be stored in the garage or through a secondary entrance near the technical room.
All of that is close by even without a pantry. Also, let the afternoon daylight fall on the sofa—anyway, you’ll need artificial or task lighting in the kitchen.
11.94 x 9.11 meters (39.2 x 29.9 ft)
No, actually not. I’m definitely not a fan of unnecessarily long corridors, but that’s not the case here. Most floor plans shared here have corridors that are only about 1.30 meters (4 ft 3 in) wide. At 1.60 meters (5 ft 3 in), you even have opportunities for furnishing.
That’s true, it does play a role. There is a cross axis to the corridor via the stair window and the window in the dining area. That creates a sense of openness.
Then use a door to the open living area, for example, a loft-style door with fixed side panels. When guests are around, you tend to be everywhere in the open living area anyway.
But children can usually handle muffled sounds quite well, as long as it’s not a direct open space carrying sound. Muffled noises and voices even have a calming effect.
Your comments are very thoughtful and helpful. You really think things through.
-Malte- schrieb:
We swapped the cloakroom and guest toilet compared to your plan
Yes, I agree with that. The cloakroom is naturally better placed by the door, and the bathroom is better near the stairs since the door won’t be right in the dirt zone, and the path from the bedroom to the second toilet is shorter. Lighting-wise, it shouldn’t make a difference because you can have a nice window in the stairwell.
-Malte- schrieb:
Our layout would have the advantage of having the kitchen right next to the pantry, and we would have a light strip or some windows integrated into the kitchen run. The disadvantage with our layout regarding the living area is that you sit on the sofa with your back to the rest of the room.
You don’t need a complicated pantry. You have above-average space for tall cabinets in this spacious kitchen, so you can do without a fancy pantry that restricts you. Raclette or fondue sets can go into the utility room; you don’t need a pantry for that. Beverage crates can be stored in the garage or through a secondary entrance near the technical room.
All of that is close by even without a pantry. Also, let the afternoon daylight fall on the sofa—anyway, you’ll need artificial or task lighting in the kitchen.
-Malte- schrieb:
Did you size the house similarly (about 12m*9m)?
11.94 x 9.11 meters (39.2 x 29.9 ft)
-Malte- schrieb:
Don’t you see a risk that it might feel like a narrow corridor?
No, actually not. I’m definitely not a fan of unnecessarily long corridors, but that’s not the case here. Most floor plans shared here have corridors that are only about 1.30 meters (4 ft 3 in) wide. At 1.60 meters (5 ft 3 in), you even have opportunities for furnishing.
-Malte- schrieb:
A key factor is probably the passage to the open living area, which you designed to be wide and completely open.
That’s true, it does play a role. There is a cross axis to the corridor via the stair window and the window in the dining area. That creates a sense of openness.
-Malte- schrieb:
But in our current house, we miss the possibility to close off the living area from the stairwell in the evening when the kids are asleep and visitors are over.
-Malte- schrieb:
What would be sensible options for that? A large sliding door that runs along the corridor side?
Then use a door to the open living area, for example, a loft-style door with fixed side panels. When guests are around, you tend to be everywhere in the open living area anyway.
But children can usually handle muffled sounds quite well, as long as it’s not a direct open space carrying sound. Muffled noises and voices even have a calming effect.
Here is my alternative. I have changed the wardrobe.
The dormer above is centered, so the projections and recesses of the walls must be as shown. The windows on both floors are also arranged in almost symmetrical alignment.
The kitchen island is 2.40 meters (7 ft 10 in) long, and the kitchen door is just an example, etc.
The dormer above is centered, so the projections and recesses of the walls must be as shown. The windows on both floors are also arranged in almost symmetrical alignment.
The kitchen island is 2.40 meters (7 ft 10 in) long, and the kitchen door is just an example, etc.
Dear @ypg, thank you very much for the further development and additional suggestions! It’s great to see how much effort you put into this and how well you support us. We really like the design.
At the moment, we have a lot going on but hopefully, between business trips, daycare viruses, and everything else, we will be able to "recreate" your version in the next few days and use it as a basis for a follow-up meeting with our architect.
Best regards
Malte
At the moment, we have a lot going on but hopefully, between business trips, daycare viruses, and everything else, we will be able to "recreate" your version in the next few days and use it as a basis for a follow-up meeting with our architect.
Best regards
Malte
-Malte- schrieb:
At the moment, we have a lot going on, but hopefully between business trips, childcare viruses, and everything else, we’ll be able to “recreate” your version in the next few days and use it as a basis for a follow-up meeting with our architect. You should never try to put drawings into an architect’s mouth, and the same applies to “copying” previously digital drawings made by others. The preliminary draft must be thoroughly discussed—every hesitation or additional change reduces the chances of successful implementation. Clean code is the foundation of MTBF, and that applies not only in ICT!
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
Hello everyone,
we are currently using the quiet season to further consider the proposed floor plan. We are happy with the current rough draft but are still thinking about the layout of the open-plan living area.
The latest design by @ypg shows the open-plan area as a linear sequence of living/dining/kitchen. This layout was originally not what we wanted, but now we can imagine it. Nevertheless, we are also considering a corner arrangement where the utility/housekeeping room is placed in the opposite corner of the house, and the living area is somewhat separated around the corner toward the front side of the building. Both versions are roughly sketched out here:
“Linear arrangement” of living/dining/kitchen:
“Corner arrangement” of living/dining/kitchen:
The main differences we see between the “linear arrangement” and the “corner arrangement” are:
Ultimately, we keep coming back to the fact that it is probably a purely personal decision based on the living atmosphere. Numerous discussions with family and friends have not helped much either.
Therefore, we would like to ask for your impressions. Do you see clear pros or cons for one of the options, and which would be your preference?
Best regards
Malte
we are currently using the quiet season to further consider the proposed floor plan. We are happy with the current rough draft but are still thinking about the layout of the open-plan living area.
The latest design by @ypg shows the open-plan area as a linear sequence of living/dining/kitchen. This layout was originally not what we wanted, but now we can imagine it. Nevertheless, we are also considering a corner arrangement where the utility/housekeeping room is placed in the opposite corner of the house, and the living area is somewhat separated around the corner toward the front side of the building. Both versions are roughly sketched out here:
“Linear arrangement” of living/dining/kitchen:
“Corner arrangement” of living/dining/kitchen:
The main differences we see between the “linear arrangement” and the “corner arrangement” are:
- Different living atmosphere
- One version is an open-plan area in a row without strong visual separation of the zones; the other arranges the space around a corner, slightly separating the living area.
- Orientation of the living area
- In the linear layout, all living spaces face the south garden, while in the corner layout, some face the south garden and others the west garden.
- Terrace placement
- In the linear layout, the terrace is placed more to the east, directly adjacent to the garage. In the corner layout, the terrace would be located at the house’s southwest corner and would not be enclosed by the garage.
- Size of the open-plan area
- With the corner layout, the open-plan area can be slightly larger (probably about 4m² (43 sq ft)) by reducing the utility/housekeeping room slightly (approximately 12m² (129 sq ft) vs. 16m² (172 sq ft)).
- Kitchen storage space
- The linear layout likely offers more storage space, as two additional tall cabinets can be placed against the central wall.
- Entrance to the open-plan area
- In the linear layout, the entrance is centered in the dining area, while in the corner layout, the entrance leads into the kitchen.
- Windows in the open-plan area
- The linear layout features one large central window in the dining area, while the corner layout tends to have several smaller windows.
- Placement of utility/housekeeping room
- In the linear layout, it is located on the street side (advantages: easier utility connections; if using an air-to-water heat pump, the outdoor unit can be placed at the front; the bathroom upstairs is located above the utility room on the ground floor)
- In the corner layout, the utility room faces the south garden (advantages: possible door to the garage; easier access to the garden for drying laundry; possible disadvantage is that the upstairs bathroom would have to drain via the downstairs WC)
Ultimately, we keep coming back to the fact that it is probably a purely personal decision based on the living atmosphere. Numerous discussions with family and friends have not helped much either.
Therefore, we would like to ask for your impressions. Do you see clear pros or cons for one of the options, and which would be your preference?
Best regards
Malte
-Malte- schrieb:
Ultimately, we keep coming back to the fact that it is probably purely a personal decision regarding the feeling of living. You’re right. It needs to feel right as a whole. Maybe you know some things from the past or other houses – there is no absolute right or wrong when it comes to such a layout. Condition: the latest explanation about the utility/technical room location in this thread is the main guiding factor for me. Once that is more or less fixed, I rely on intuition based on how I assess the homeowners.
Here are my intentions:
-Malte- schrieb:
Orientation of the living area
- For terraced houses, all living rooms face the south-facing garden, while for corner houses some face the south garden and others face the west-facing garden.
Variant I also has a window facing west, just none facing north towards the street.
-Malte- schrieb:
Placement of the terrace
- For terraced houses, the terrace is located farther east, directly next to the garage. For corner houses, the terrace would be placed at the southwest corner of the house and would not be "enclosed" by the garage.
A corner terrace is often seen as cozier, especially since the wind usually comes from the west. A terrace roof or canopy can also be installed more easily there.
-Malte- schrieb:
Size of the open-plan area
- For corner houses, the open-plan area can be made slightly larger (probably about 4m² (43 sq ft)) by making the utility/technical room slightly smaller (about 12m² (130 sq ft) instead of 16m² (172 sq ft)).
Your strongest desire (and big concern 😉) was to have enough storage space in the freezer/utility room.
-Malte- schrieb:
Kitchen storage space
- For terraced houses, probably more storage space, since two more tall cabinets can be placed against the interior wall.
Yep. Personally, I might even skip the kitchen door and mark it as “just for you”. You could install a whole wall of cabinets there.
-Malte- schrieb:
Entrance to the open-plan area
- For terraced houses, entrance is centrally into the dining area, whereas for corner houses, entrance leads into the kitchen.
I always prefer a large passage door or opening at dining room height if possible. A loft door or even no door, practically open to the stairs. For me, the dining area is the meeting point for all occupants. The kitchen entrance could be an issue with small children during parties, surprises, or birthdays. Also, if you’re not the tidiest person in the kitchen, you can simply avoid the kitchen and guide guests around it instead of through it.
-Malte- schrieb:
Windows in the open-plan area
- For terraced houses, a large central window in the dining area; for corner houses, generally several smaller windows.
Yep, the large open view towards the garden is usually preferred. I’ll take a look at how you have it drawn. I’d say: whether the patio door is 2, 3, or 4 meters wide (about 6½, 9¾, or 13 feet) it’s always better than narrow “shooting slit” windows, unless you add those additionally. As you like. With me, you almost always have the garden in sight.
-Malte- schrieb:
Placement of the utility/technical room
- For terraced houses, it’s located on the street side (advantages: easier house connections; if using an air-to-water heat pump, the external unit can be placed at the front of the house; bathroom upstairs above the utility room on the ground floor).
Where we are (Lower Saxony), it’s not allowed to build over any utility lines. That would only be possible with a carport. That’s why it is often located at the front. Also, you usually don’t want to waste south-facing space for storage.
-Malte- schrieb:
For corner houses, the utility/technical room faces the south garden (advantages: door to garage possible; easier access to the garden for drying laundry; disadvantage(?) upstairs bathroom would need to drain through the downstairs toilet). The door through takes up storage space. You don’t really need it because a freezer room is not a corridor. It is perfectly located behind the entrance door, which is right next to the garage door. In our region, it’s frowned upon to dry laundry in the main garden. It is usually placed somewhere to the side where it is not directly visible. For an L-shaped layout, the bathroom would drain through the living room (which) would not be good. But you could mirror the upstairs layout.
The tendency on your side is towards the L-shape. I can provide you with some bird’s-eye views of the I variant again. Possibly also of the L.
Thanks for communicating; it makes helping more enjoyable.
Similar topics