Would it be cheaper to do a two storey extension rather than two separate
one storey extensions? Also, what are the foundation costs for a 1, 2 or 3
storey extension? I assume they don't double or triple?

TIA
Suzanne

On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 10:23:53 -0000, Suz wrote:

Would it be cheaper to do a two storey extension rather than two separate
one storey extensions? Also, what are the foundation costs for a 1, 2 or 3
storey extension? I assume they don't double or triple?

TIA
Suzanne

yes, sligthly.

not much compared with everything else.

PS watch out for loss of space if you need a second staircase..

On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 10:23:53 -0000, "Suz" wrote:

| Also, what are the foundation costs for a 1, 2 or 3
| storey extension? I assume they don't double or triple?

I recently discussed this point with my son in law who is in the
middle of extending, and his answer was hardly any increase. He put
two storey foundations in for a single storey extension, just in
case.
--
Dave Fawthrop dave hyphenologist co uk Sick of Premium SMS scams,
SMS marketing, Direct marketing phone calls, Silent phone calls?
Register with http://www.tpsonline.org.uk/tps/
IME they work :-)

Would it be cheaper to do a two storey extension rather than two separate
one storey extensions? Also, what are the foundation costs for a 1, 2 or
3
storey extension? I assume they don't double or triple?

Two storey is somewhat cheaper, as you only need one roof and the
foundations and lower storey barely need to be different. You use half the
land, too, which is a bigger saving.

However, it depends what you need the space for. Most people prefer to sleep
upstairs so that they can leave their windows open and not have axe wielding
murderers popping in for a chat. Most people prefer their reception rooms
downstairs so that they are not forever trooping up and down the stairs.

Christian.

I recently discussed this point with my son in law who is in the
middle of extending, and his answer was hardly any increase. He put
two storey foundations in for a single storey extension, just in
case.
According to my local BCO, foundations are the same for one or two
storey
extensions these days. 1 metre default, with extra depth according to
ground
conditions. Of course difficult ground may need a raft.
Building 2 single storey extensions is double the foundations, which is
can
be a few grand in cost.
Simon.

"Suz" wrote in message
...
Would it be cheaper to do a two storey extension rather than two separate
one storey extensions? Also, what are the foundation costs for a 1, 2 or
3 storey extension? I assume they don't double or triple?


Yes ... as you only pay for 1 roof and 1 set of foundations.

Impossible to say foundation costs without knowing what type of foundations
you are going for .. standard strip, trenchfill, raft, mini-pile etc.
If you want a guide as around neighbours - that will give a guide to typical
foundation requirements - but no guarantee until you start to dig what you
have there.

Rick

On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 13:02:11 +0000, Owain
wrote:


A two-storey extension can look more as though it was part of the house
originally, especially if the planners

Is anybody up for a quick poll ?

Is there anybody here, who isn't a planner, who thinks an extension is
better if it is *not* closely integrated and, if so, why ?

I really can't see why planners are so dead set on extensions being
built in a way that emphasizes that an extension has been added rather
than minimizing the impact. It seems, to me, to defy common sense.

and the budget permit a pitched
roof to be integrated into the main house roof.

Cheers,

John

A two-storey extension can look more as though it was part of the house
originally, especially if the planners

Is anybody up for a quick poll ?

Is there anybody here, who isn't a planner, who thinks an extension is
better if it is *not* closely integrated and, if so, why ?

I really can't see why planners are so dead set on extensions being
built in a way that emphasizes that an extension has been added rather
than minimizing the impact. It seems, to me, to defy common sense.

I agree. But my colleagues in Building Control don't seem so keen. I don't
understand why?
Suz,

[John Anderton] :
Is there anybody here, who isn't a planner, who thinks an extension
is better if it is *not* closely integrated and, if so, why ?

I really can't see why planners are so dead set on extensions being
built in a way that emphasizes that an extension has been added
rather than minimizing the impact. It seems, to me, to defy common
sense.

If you mean requiring the front wall of a side extension to be set back
1m or so from the front of the house, then the reason for this is to
avoid the appearance of terracing in road of semis.

--
Tony Bryer SDA UK 'Software to build on' http://www.sda.co.uk
Free SEDBUK boiler database browser http://www.sda.co.uk/qsedbuk.htm
[Latest version QSEDBUK 1.12 released 8 Dec 2005]

On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 22:32:04 GMT, Tony Bryer
wrote:

[John Anderton] :
Is there anybody here, who isn't a planner, who thinks an extension
is better if it is *not* closely integrated and, if so, why ?

I really can't see why planners are so dead set on extensions being
built in a way that emphasizes that an extension has been added
rather than minimizing the impact. It seems, to me, to defy common
sense.

If you mean requiring the front wall of a side extension to be set back
1m or so from the front of the house, then the reason for this is to
avoid the appearance of terracing in road of semis.

Sounds reasonable in that situation, but there's a house down the road
from me which is detached, but "because it's in a conservation area"
the front wall had to be moved back 30cm and the side extension isn't
big enough to make the resulting house look like a pair of semis or
anything.

Very weird,

Cheers,

John

On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 11:52:49 GMT, John Anderton wrote:

On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 13:02:11 +0000, Owain
wrote:


A two-storey extension can look more as though it was part of the house
originally, especially if the planners

Is anybody up for a quick poll ?

Is there anybody here, who isn't a planner, who thinks an extension is
better if it is *not* closely integrated and, if so, why ?


No, I don't.

I had an old house with a less old roof and a modern extesnion.
UI ripped it all down and was fiorced to put up what looked like an old
house with a slightly less old extension.

Complete ********.

Frankly, if I wanted to extend a period house I'd want to extend it as
closely matching the original..I hate seeing old timber framed houses with
conservatories in UPVC tacked on.

I really can't see why planners are so dead set on extensions being
built in a way that emphasizes that an extension has been added rather
than minimizing the impact. It seems, to me, to defy common sense.


Moi aussi mate.

Its presumably in their book of rules.

Wait till you see our local monstrosity. A 16th century timber framed house
with a 21st century timber clad packing crate tacked on the side, complete
with HUGE pcture window. Surrounded by enough sodium lamps to be seen for
miles.

Its LISTED too. AND it got third prize in RIBA awards last year.

Google 'wakelyns' for all the pseudo bollocky artistic prententiousness.

On Mon, 19 Dec 2005 16:39:17 +0000, Owain wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Its LISTED too. AND it got third prize in RIBA awards last year.

Winner of the Stirling Prize - Scottish Parliament.

Voted onto Top 10 Buildings to be X Listed for Demolition - Scottish
Parliament.

Owain

There is a remarkable similarity.

Wait till you see our local monstrosity. A 16th century timber framed
house
with a 21st century timber clad packing crate tacked on the side, complete
with HUGE pcture window. Surrounded by enough sodium lamps to be seen for
miles.

Its LISTED too. AND it got third prize in RIBA awards last year.

Google 'wakelyns' for all the pseudo bollocky artistic prententiousness.


Can't find it. Can you paste a link?

...
Would it be cheaper to do a two storey extension rather than two separate
one storey extensions? Also, what are the foundation costs for a 1, 2 or
3 storey extension? I assume they don't double or triple?


Yes ... as you only pay for 1 roof and 1 set of foundations.

Impossible to say foundation costs without knowing what type of
foundations you are going for .. standard strip, trenchfill, raft,
mini-pile etc.
If you want a guide as around neighbours - that will give a guide to
typical foundation requirements - but no guarantee until you start to dig
what you have there.

Rick
The bad news is that the bottom of the garden is heavy clay.....

On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 22:32:04 GMT, Tony Bryer
wrote:

[John Anderton] :
Is there anybody here, who isn't a planner, who thinks an extension
is better if it is *not* closely integrated and, if so, why ?

I really can't see why planners are so dead set on extensions being
built in a way that emphasizes that an extension has been added
rather than minimizing the impact. It seems, to me, to defy common
sense.

If you mean requiring the front wall of a side extension to be set back
1m or so from the front of the house, then the reason for this is to
avoid the appearance of terracing in road of semis.

This rule was applied to us, despite our semi being on the corner
plot. Strangely another extension in the middle of the row was
allowed without a "set-back".

Mark.