Bungalow with hipped roof – Is roof conversion sensible?

We had an older development plan from 1970 in which several multi-family houses with three floors each were planned. However, the seller only sells if the buyers also build single-family houses. This statement is known, so all buyers rely on it and so far it has been the case.

The development plan will not be changed for this. Three full floors are allowed, a knee wall of 20cm, and a maximum roof pitch of 30°.

We applied for a deviation from the development plan at the district and were approved. Instead of three stories, we are building only 1.5 stories, but we increase the knee wall to 100cm and the roof pitch to 45°.

Otherwise, most neighbors build two full stories and then a hip roof with a 30° pitch, a city villa basically.

Whether you can expand and use your roof effectively, you can also see if you sketch it out with a set square and pencil. Draw the cross-section, ceiling area, knee wall, roof pitch. Then draw with dashed lines where the height between the top edge of the floor to the bottom edge of the roof construction is 2m (excluding additional floor buildup, screed, underfloor heating, laminate). The area between the two dashed lines you can stand upright in. Is this area sufficient for a living space?

Wonderful suggestions on how something like this can look in practice are also provided by the house catalog of Scanhaus Marlow. They have such types in their program. Bungalows with expansion reserve. They also gave us the idea to think this way back then. Karsten

That doesn’t sound bad at all. What kind of knee wall do you have (I can't really tell because of the blue foil ^^)?


Thanks for the tip! I tried to sketch it for myself with, for example, a floor area of 9 x 12m for about 90 sqm living space downstairs. If I use the 35 degrees, I get about 28-30 sqm area at a height of 2m (floor structure and partition wall bedroom/bathroom disregarded). So sounds doable.

What I am still wondering:

How do you calculate the construction costs here? Normally, I roughly calculate 120 sqm x 1800€ for the house (ancillary costs etc. initially left aside).
Is it realistic then if I calculate in the bungalow version 90 sqm downstairs + 30 sqm upstairs or do I have to calculate the full 90 sqm (or at least more than the 30 sqm) upstairs, even if it cannot be used 100%? For the living area calculation usually the former is used, but does that also apply to the cost calculation?

Kniestock, none. We Norsemen don’t really like that. It always makes the houses look so gangly. For me, a bungalow should look a bit like it was just thrown together. That’s why I also find roof pitches greater than 35 aesthetically borderline. The most beautiful is under 30, but then you can forget about expanding it.

Have a general contractor who can do custom work calculate it for you. It won’t be more expensive than any other house. The base slab is larger, yes. But not more wall surfaces. Slightly more cost for the roof. But no reinforced concrete ceiling. I don’t want to mention our price here again, because apparently it is very inexpensive compared to what is paid elsewhere. Orient yourself to the price list from Scanhaus Marlow Marlow, that’s about right if you realistically assume that this will not be the final price.
I’m attaching a photo, taken this morning.
Karsten

The development plan is for a complete new residential area, which will partly be developed this year and the rest (where my desired plot is located) will only be developed next year. Various subareas were grouped according to Tuscan houses, bungalows, and gable roofs.

Before some municipal council meetings, drug tests should probably be conducted

That's how it is known in the council. Nicely sorted by factions. One territory for the Blacks, one for the Reds, one for the Greens, maybe another for the Yellows. That's how life should be as well. The citizen should please also sort themselves. Karsten