ᐅ Basement versus Increased Living Space on the Ground Floor
Created on: 19 Apr 2022 20:36
H
HalloClarissa
Dear all,
We are planning to build a bungalow with 3 rooms and about 85 sqm (915 sq ft) of living space. Since the plot is on a slope, we need to build with a partial basement.
Which option would likely be more cost-effective:
1. Living area on the ground floor (including a guest room) of 85 sqm (915 sq ft) and a 50 sqm (538 sq ft) basement used mainly as a utility cellar with a technical room (then we would only need one bathroom).
2. Ground floor only 75 sqm (808 sq ft), guest room in the partially finished 50 sqm (538 sq ft) basement as living space (which would require a second bathroom but could be fitted out later by ourselves).
As soon as the basement is meant to have living space, the access routes must be heated and insulated. Also, an internal staircase is necessary. A purely utility basement could possibly be accessed only from outside without an internal staircase, saving space.
Theoretically, a room on the ground floor requires about 12 sqm (129 sq ft). If this room is located in the basement, additional space for stairs on both floors and another hallway is needed, approximately 24 sqm (258 sq ft).
Am I thinking about this correctly?
Has anyone calculated a similar case before?
We are planning to build a bungalow with 3 rooms and about 85 sqm (915 sq ft) of living space. Since the plot is on a slope, we need to build with a partial basement.
Which option would likely be more cost-effective:
1. Living area on the ground floor (including a guest room) of 85 sqm (915 sq ft) and a 50 sqm (538 sq ft) basement used mainly as a utility cellar with a technical room (then we would only need one bathroom).
2. Ground floor only 75 sqm (808 sq ft), guest room in the partially finished 50 sqm (538 sq ft) basement as living space (which would require a second bathroom but could be fitted out later by ourselves).
As soon as the basement is meant to have living space, the access routes must be heated and insulated. Also, an internal staircase is necessary. A purely utility basement could possibly be accessed only from outside without an internal staircase, saving space.
Theoretically, a room on the ground floor requires about 12 sqm (129 sq ft). If this room is located in the basement, additional space for stairs on both floors and another hallway is needed, approximately 24 sqm (258 sq ft).
Am I thinking about this correctly?
Has anyone calculated a similar case before?
HalloClarissa21 Apr 2022 14:09HalloClarissa schrieb:
So, do you think that a split-level design will be more cost-effective than a partial basement, which serves as both utility and living space, thus also saving the need for additional sheds or similar?
Wouldn’t the wall between the slope level and the street level, since it is in contact with the soil, ultimately need to be constructed as a type of “watertight concrete structure” (known as a “white tank”)?
How many meters of height difference can generally be achieved without major issues using two staggered floor slabs? If I assume a 20% slope, the land drops by 1 meter every 5 meters. So, could I create the foundation slab split in half with a 1 m height difference, then build up the lower level by 1 m, and place a standard bungalow on top? The lower level would then have a ceiling height that is 1 m higher. Would this be practical?
Sorry, this sketch was just made on the train.
HalloClarissa schrieb:
So, do you mean that a split-level design would be more cost-effective than a partial basement that serves as both utility and living space, thereby also eliminating the need for additional sheds or similar structures?
Wouldn’t the wall between the hillside level and the street level, being in contact with soil, ultimately need to be constructed as a kind of “watertight concrete tank” (also known as a “white tank”)?
How many meters of height difference can you reasonably manage with two staggered floor slabs? Not you... me! And yes, I consider the idea to be cost-neutral compared to a partial basement, but with better living quality. Basically, also for older age.
HalloClarissa schrieb:
OR, as others suggest, a split-level house where the required rooms are at street level, but the guest room and the utility/laundry room could certainly be on the lower level. That’s my view. Although I have said and explained that the utility room is used about 10 times a day, whereas the bedroom might only be used 1-2 times a day.
11ant schrieb:
I thought we had agreed by now that a partial basement would only be sufficient for utility space (?), I find split-level unsuitable since the goal is clearly an accessible residence suitable for wheelchair users; also, split-level makes no sense if the ground on the building footprint differs in height by a full story. No, you are convinced.
.
The current design, and I assume the revised one as well, is not what you want or what will work (sorry to say, but I can tell from plans whether something is just an idea or a well-developed concept with potential).
The land and your requirements have been calling out for a professional for days. Anything else is a waste of time. The theoretical questions keep repeating as well.
Edit: with split level, the front part of the building would be buried about 50-100cm (20-40 inches) on the south side… first I would design the platform for parking..
HalloClarissa schrieb:
So, could I now create the foundation slab split with a 1 m (3.3 ft) height difference, build up the lower level by 1 m (3.3 ft), and then place a standard bungalow on top? The lower level would then simply have a 1 m (3.3 ft) higher ceiling height. Would that be practical? That would just turn the nonsense of building a hillside house not on a basement but on a 2 m (6.6 ft) high concrete block ring into a “same thing, just in two steps” version. No, it’s not really sensible, but maybe amusing. Instead of having more ceiling height in the lower part, I would rather go back to the shed roof idea.
HalloClarissa schrieb:
Ultimately, if really necessary later, one could also install a stairlift for the small height difference in the split-level area. If you want to avoid a stairlift, you can just build with full-height floors in the usual way. Split-level is not “half multi-storey” by concept, because there is no such thing as “half pregnant.” It is multi-storey; it just varies the floor levels by half a story.
HalloClarissa schrieb:
a split-level house where the living spaces are on street level, but the guest room and utility/mudroom could be on the lower level. The basic concept of “everyday living on one level, with stairs only for occasional-use rooms” can be implemented either with half-storey offsets or with classic full-storey stacking.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
HalloClarissa21 Apr 2022 15:00ypg schrieb:
Not you… me! And yes, I consider the idea cost-neutral compared to a partial basement, but with more living quality. Basically, and also for old age.
Me. While I said and explained that the utility room is used about 10 times a day, whereas the bedroom maybe only 1-2 times.
No, you agree.
.
The current design, and I assume also the revised one, is not what one would want or what works (sorry for the wording, but I can tell from designs whether it’s just an idea or a well-developed concept with potential).
And the plot combined with the wishes has been crying out for a professional for days. Everything else is a waste of time. The theoretical question keeps repeating itself by now.
Edit: with a pitched roof the front building section would be buried about 50-100cm (20-40 inches) in the south… first I would design the platform for parking..A professional has now actually been arranged, but even they are often quite one-sided and not truly objective in their thinking, so I want to be prepared for such a conversation.