ᐅ Building a Concrete Garage! Three Walls or an Extension to the House? What Do You Think?
Created on: 13 Jul 2018 11:00
K
kingstiefel
Hello everyone,
We are building a prefabricated house in NRW with the company Scanhaus Marlow Marlow. The building permit / planning permission process is currently underway. What was already clear to us beforehand is that Scanhaus Marlow Marlow is not involved in the garage construction. Therefore, we are currently focusing quite intensively on this topic.
After thorough research, we would like to have a concrete garage. For various reasons, we decided against steel. Unfortunately, it is very difficult for us to install a prefabricated concrete garage. The garage is planned to be placed on the left side of the house, under the roof overhang. The roof overhang has a height of 3m (10 feet) and is 1.20m (4 feet) wide. For this reason, hardly any prefabricated concrete garage manufacturers can install the garage at our location. Of course, there are also concrete garage manufacturers who produce "concrete individual parts" and assemble them on site.
We have now met with an architect who is going to design and estimate a masonry garage for us. He proposed building a garage with three walls plus a roof. The fourth wall would then be the house wall. From our house planning discussions, we know that no trades or fixtures may be attached to our house. The architect explained that the house does not have to bear any load or similar, as this is supported by the three garage walls. Of course, we understand that nothing can be attached to the fourth wall (house wall). This would be acceptable to us. An advantage of this idea is that we would save the cost of an additional wall and have roughly 20cm (8 inches) more space in the garage (due to the missing extra wall).
I have never heard of such a solution before. Does anyone have experience with this?
We have concerns regarding structural engineering, insulation, etc.
We would appreciate any feedback.
Best regards
We are building a prefabricated house in NRW with the company Scanhaus Marlow Marlow. The building permit / planning permission process is currently underway. What was already clear to us beforehand is that Scanhaus Marlow Marlow is not involved in the garage construction. Therefore, we are currently focusing quite intensively on this topic.
After thorough research, we would like to have a concrete garage. For various reasons, we decided against steel. Unfortunately, it is very difficult for us to install a prefabricated concrete garage. The garage is planned to be placed on the left side of the house, under the roof overhang. The roof overhang has a height of 3m (10 feet) and is 1.20m (4 feet) wide. For this reason, hardly any prefabricated concrete garage manufacturers can install the garage at our location. Of course, there are also concrete garage manufacturers who produce "concrete individual parts" and assemble them on site.
We have now met with an architect who is going to design and estimate a masonry garage for us. He proposed building a garage with three walls plus a roof. The fourth wall would then be the house wall. From our house planning discussions, we know that no trades or fixtures may be attached to our house. The architect explained that the house does not have to bear any load or similar, as this is supported by the three garage walls. Of course, we understand that nothing can be attached to the fourth wall (house wall). This would be acceptable to us. An advantage of this idea is that we would save the cost of an additional wall and have roughly 20cm (8 inches) more space in the garage (due to the missing extra wall).
I have never heard of such a solution before. Does anyone have experience with this?
We have concerns regarding structural engineering, insulation, etc.
We would appreciate any feedback.
Best regards
C
Caspar202016 Jul 2018 20:45So far, I only knew the traditional version.
Traumfaenger schrieb:
But today’s “solid” construction method, which uses a lot of Styrofoam and very little mass, no longer reminds me personally of the old stone castles that seem to have stuck in some people’s minds.I agree with that.Back to the topic: Even with a prefab house, it should just be a matter of coordination. The prefab builder would just need to schedule the garage installer to come in between the wall assembly and the roof installation.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
C
Caspar202017 Jul 2018 16:1911ant schrieb:
A prefab house should just be a matter of coordination: the prefab manufacturer would only need to schedule the garage delivery between the wall assembly and the roof installationThe available time window is 2 hours on the first day (usually quite late in the evening). Within a maximum of 2 days, a wooden cabin including the roof is erected.
Good luck with the coordination; that’s why they deliver the garage first, then the house builder follows.
Traumfaenger schrieb:
For me personally, today’s "solid" construction method with a lot of Styrofoam and little mass no longer has much to do with the old castle image that seems to be stuck in some people’s minds.It’s more likely that something has settled in your mind instead. Like the idea that "thicker means more solid." Materials also evolve over time. Or is a 40-year-old Mercedes really safer just because it looks less damaged after a crash? Ask the occupant...
A functional wall (or whatever you want to call it, meaning external thermal insulation composite system/ETICS) with 17.5cm (7 inches) calcium silicate brick, thermal conductivity 1.8, has a mass of 315 kg/m² (64.5 lb/ft²). The ETICS also adds some weight, but assuming it’s made of EPS, we can neglect that for now. But a quick reminder here: ETICS does not always mean EPS; there are many other insulation materials suitable for facades. Mineral wool, for example, would significantly increase the mass.
For comparison, a 36.5cm (14.4 inches) Poroton T8 brick weighs 219 kg/m² (44.8 lb/ft²). A 49cm (19.3 inches) Poroton T7 filled with perlite weighs 270 kg/m² (55.3 lb/ft²). It achieves thermal insulation similar to 17.5cm (7 inches) calcium silicate brick plus 24cm (9.4 inches) EPS with thermal conductivity 0.032. The construction is therefore 8.5cm (3.3 inches) thinner (meaning savings in surface area = cost savings), more massive, and several tens of thousands of euros cheaper, at least here in North Rhine-Westphalia.
Don’t get me wrong, monolithic walls have their advantages. At the start of the project, I was also set on building this way, but reality soon caught up. The neighbor is building like that, about €30,000 more expensive than with ETICS, but money is no object for him. Fair enough, if you can afford it. It may be different in other regions; here, it’s uncommon, and the bricks are transported in from elsewhere.
Some also build with 17.5cm (7 inches) Poroton plus ETICS. That was offered to us as well and would have been €1,500 cheaper than calcium silicate brick (same shell builder).
Alex85 schrieb:
It seems something got stuck in your mind, like the idea that "thicker = more solid." However, he is right with the image comparison – interestingly, the picture of the castle is from a time when people built monolithically with 25 cm (10 inches) walls plus plaster.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
Similar topics