ᐅ 100-110 m² Bungalow: How much living space is possible in the attic? What are the costs?

Created on: 1 Jul 2016 16:02
E
Enterich
E
Enterich
1 Jul 2016 16:02
Hello everyone

We are considering building for a second time if we secure a plot of land.

Even though we are both only 30 years old, we really like the idea of a bungalow designed as much as possible to be age-appropriate right from the start (1-meter (3.3 ft) doors, walk-in shower, etc.).

Now the idea came up to build a bungalow of about 100-110 m² (1,076-1,184 sq ft) and then, during the year after moving in, to finish the entire upper floor ourselves and create partition walls using a lightweight construction system.

So, first of all, a general question: How much living space can you typically expect in such an attic floor (“standard” building regulations, maximum ridge height of 9.5 m (31 ft)) on top of a 100-110 m² (1,076-1,184 sq ft) ground floor?

What do you think would be the price difference for a roof, compared to the lightweight construction option? The plan is to install screed including underfloor heating on the upper floor right from the start.
Can someone roughly estimate the cost of a solidly built bungalow with brick cladding, a maximum roof pitch, and screed on the upper floor, including all additional costs?
According to my calculations, it would be around €170,000, excluding the kitchen, garden, and land/fees/transfer tax. The plot will cost about €80,000 including notary fees and transfer tax. Another €30,000 is planned for kitchen and garden.

Thank you very much for any advice!
L
Legurit
1 Jul 2016 16:24
Do you want to build a 110 sqm (1,184 sq ft) bungalow, or a classic single-story detached house with a converted attic? If the building regulations allow it (a ridge height of 9.5 m (31 ft) is already quite significant), I would also consider a two-story design and any knee wall height in between.

We know two bungalows personally – one has a half-timbered roof with cross and diagonal braces, so there is no possibility for conversion. The other has an accessible roof, but it is not designed to support the load of a regular living floor. Our attic, for example, is statically rated for only 1.6 kN/sqm (160 kg or 33 lbs per sq ft). Screed, insulation, and floor covering on the ground floor ceiling already add around 165 kg/sqm (34 lbs per sq ft). Of course, a different floor structure would be chosen, but this must be carefully considered during planning.
E
Enterich
1 Jul 2016 16:56
We assumed it would be more cost-effective to first build a bungalow of about 100-110m² (1,076-1,184 sq ft) and later fully convert the attic.
A standard one-and-a-half-story gable roof house is, of course, also an option. However, in that case, a steeper roof pitch and a second staircase would be necessary to convert the attic into a sewing room/storage space. The question is which is cheaper; additionally, a bungalow always has the advantage that the 100-110m² (1,076-1,184 sq ft) on the ground floor can be easily lived in when older.

A screed in the attic is not a must, but unfortunately, with supply temperatures of 30-35 degrees Celsius (86-95°F), it is not possible to warm the upper floor without underfloor heating embedded in the screed. Currently, in our semi-detached townhouse villa’s attic, we have a fairly large radiator installed, which according to the heating system design should be sufficient at 30-35 degrees Celsius (86-95°F). No chance, it doesn’t work at all.

I haven’t considered the load on the ceiling caused by the screed and the resulting additional costs. I was naively assuming about €10,000 for the larger roof, another 4 times €750 for four roof windows, €5,000-6,000 for the screed and underfloor heating—and that would be it. Electrical work and attic conversion would be done by ourselves.
L
Legurit
1 Jul 2016 17:36
A building expert can probably provide more details, but I think that a gable roof house without a finished attic and without knee walls is not significantly more expensive than a bungalow—gable walls, on the other hand, mean less roof area and, I believe, a somewhat simpler roof design.

110 sqm (1,184 sq ft) of living space on the ground floor is actually quite spacious, not as cozy as many think... something like the Viebrockhaus Maxime 495 Z. We have something similar—about 105 sqm (1,130 sq ft) on the ground floor and 85 sqm (915 sq ft) upstairs—and ended up with a master bedroom and bathroom on the ground floor and just the usual rooms otherwise (we actually sleep in the attic now because sleeping downstairs felt strange).

But back to the basics: you have a house and want to move out—why? Why does it no longer meet your needs? What are your requirements? Are you planning to have more children? Thinking about age is definitely important—we did the same—but to severely limit yourself now (or to build a house that is way too large) seems unnecessary to me. You can still easily manage stairs for at least 40 years. If the zoning plan permits, you should also consider a two-story house—you could certainly build the upper floor with drywall construction or maybe postpone finishing it for now.

P.S.: When finishing the upper floor, make sure to heat that part of the house from the start, or else you risk mold problems.

P.P.S.: In summary, I would either build a true bungalow designed to your needs—if you want rooms for children, probably closer to 140 sqm (1,507 sq ft)—or alternatively a regular house with an attic or two stories.
E
Enterich
1 Jul 2016 18:09
We currently live in a semi-detached house, but due to the quite low floor area ratio of 0.25 (about 300m² (3230 sq ft) plot), a townhouse-style villa was built here.
For small townhouse villas (ours has 110m² (1184 sq ft) without the attic), the ground floor is extremely small compared to a typical pitched-roof house.
As a result, we have a living room of "only" 26.5m² (285 sq ft), which wouldn’t be the biggest issue. By now, the utility room with around 4m² (43 sq ft) is simply too small, the stroller is stored in the already cramped hallway, and so on.
Additionally, due to building regulations (building boundaries), it is not possible to build a carport or garage, except possibly in the middle of the already small plot.

The second major point is: our current mortgage interest rate is 4.2%, and it runs out in 6 years. The plan was to rent out the old house for at least 6 years, then possibly sell it and repay the expensive loan completely with a small profit. In other words, the plan is to buy a larger, detached house with a much bigger garden on a fixed 25-year mortgage.
Electrical work, tiling, attic conversion, garden landscaping, painting, and similar tasks would be done by ourselves.

The question is whether all these wishes can be realized for a maximum of €280,000 (80,000, up to a maximum of 95,000 would cover the plot including property transfer taxes/notary fees) including the kitchen, paving stones for paths/driveway, garden shed, etc.
B
Bauexperte
1 Jul 2016 21:19
Enterich schrieb:

We assumed it would be more cost-effective to first build a bungalow with 100-110m² (1076-1184 sq ft) in order to fully finish the upper floor later.

That still counts as a traditional single-family house; a bungalow only has one level: the ground floor and maybe some attic storage space.
Enterich schrieb:

A regular one-and-a-half-story house with a pitched roof is also an option of course. But that would require a steep roof pitch and a second staircase to convert the attic into a sewing room or storage space. The question is which is cheaper, especially since a bungalow always has the advantage that you can comfortably live on the 100-110m² (1076-1184 sq ft) ground floor in old age.

A true bungalow—meaning a single-story building—is always more expensive than a classic single-story house with an upper half-story.

So before you can expect a reliable answer, you need to decide what you really want: a single-story single-family house or a bungalow?

Best regards, Bauexperte