ᐅ Full story or with knee wall?

If the plot is on a slope, 6.50 m (21 ft 4 in) does not necessarily mean two full stories, or you might need to dig into the higher side so that the 6.50 m (21 ft 4 in) height is maintained on the lower side. Of course, this also depends on the width of the house and the roof pitch. By the way, we were also told that two full stories are more cost-effective.

Anitra schrieb:
By the way, we were also told that two full stories are more cost-effective.

I really can’t agree with that statement, and I’m quite certain that, depending on the design, a 1.5-story house is not necessarily more expensive. If there aren’t large window areas in the gable and roof or dormers extending on every side, a 1.5-story house is always more affordable.

The additional full story is not only fully masonry all the way up but also includes another reinforced concrete floor slab at 18, 20, or 22mm (0.7, 0.8, or 0.9 inches) thickness. On top of that, there are more windows, shutters, and the usual roof structure.

You are probably right. It really depends on the specific design. However, if the knee wall is very high, as discussed in this thread—meaning you can practically stand up all the way to the exterior wall—it seems logical to me that this would be more expensive than two full stories. With the classic one-and-a-half-story design featuring a lower knee wall, the price looks different again.

But that’s just my personal, non-professional opinion. If you want to know precisely for your individual case, only comparison quotes for the different options will help.

Uploading the floor plan definitely makes sense.

Here are our experiences: Last year, when making our decision, we obtained quotes from local concrete construction companies. Initially, we planned a house with 1.5 stories but then decided to go for two full stories with otherwise the same specifications. Provider 1 said they could build two full stories at no extra cost, Provider 2 wanted 5,000 euros more, and Provider 3 also offered no additional cost.

Other friends suggested that it might be better not to build two full stories, as then you could have a taller attic space (depending on the zoning plan / local regulations). However, we preferred having two full stories, and for us, the attic is really just a low storage area.

apokolok schrieb:
Your shell builder is a smart man.
Nobody builds knee walls that are 1.90 meters (6 ft 3 in) high.

Then I’m not a human^^

For those who want to see what this looks like: "Helma Musterhaus Chemnitz" or house type "Trient"

In my opinion, the dormer provides a better appearance than a full second floor with a gable roof. The 1.90 to 2.00 meters (6 ft 3 in to 6 ft 7 in) come from the minimum parapet height of the narrow window bands plus roller shutter box plus ring beam plus roof purlin.

PS, it’s a matter of taste! I’m not trying to sell anything here, just showing that it can look good! Perfect for us & love at first sight!

Mottenhausen schrieb:
then I’m not human^^

For those who want to see what this looks like: "Helma Musterhaus Chemnitz" or house type "Trient"

In my opinion, the dormer offers a better appearance than a full second floor with a gable roof. The 1.90–2.00 m (6.2–6.6 ft) result from the minimum parapet height of the narrow strip windows plus roller shutter box, ring beam, and roof purlin.

PS, it’s a matter of taste! I’m not trying to sell anything here, just showing that it can look good! Perfect for us & love at first sight!

That looks good. More appealing than a tall two-story building.
I know you wanted to respond as a human
... for the original poster it’s about cost-benefit, so a third gable would be completely out of the question.