snoozee

i am trying to imagine your layout and honestly, i'm not sure if you can achieve what you plan to do as your house is in a 2 storey zone based on your intention of inserting a mezzanine between 2nd storey and attic. you mentioned you will have a double volume living room for half of it (at the back based on what you had mentioned so far). i assume your living room is on the 1st storey/ground floor. so with half of the living room being double volume (behind), the other half (in front) will have a floor plate. so is your architect going to declare the side where there is no double volume the mezzanine storey or 2nd storey? if the half floor (in front) next to the double volume living room is going to be declared as a mezzanine, then you can't have another mezzanine between the 2nd storey and attic. I don't think URA allows for more than 1 mezzanine floor within a single landed house. if the half floor next to the double volume living room is going to be declared as 2nd storey, then you can't have a mezzanine floor above this because by definition, a mezzanine floor cannot be a complete floor by itself. Technically mezzanine floors can only be 50% size of the floor below but URA had relaxed their regulations for this and will approve on a case by case basis. the only way (i think) you can insert a mezzanine between 2nd storey and attic is that you have a entire 2nd storey floor plate which is at 3.1m from the ground floor which will mean no double volume living room at all

Depending on how big your mezzanine floor area is, you may not get approval from URA for your loft as they may count that as mezzanine floor area as well. Eg: If your mezzanine floor area is 50% of your lower floor’s GFA and your loft is 15% to 20% of lower floor’s GFA, you might still get approval. But if your mezzanine floor GFA is already at 60% and your loft GFA is 20%, it is most likely to be rejected as the overall GFA for mezzanine is too much. from what you described, it sounds like your house has quite a bit of split levels. Definitely not ideal for older folks as lift can’t access those split levels. 3.1m floor to ceiling would most likely mean a floor to floor height of between 3.3m to 3.6m depending on how the PE designs the structure. Assuming your attic storey is 3.5m from floor to roof, you will be left with a height of 5.2m to 4.9m for the 2nd storey and mezzanine. This is almost marginal already as BCA requires a minimum floor to ceiling height of 2.4m for rooms. Do note that this low height will cause “problems” as well if you want to have ceiling fans for the rooms. So you need to consider this when you compress the room heights.

You can insert the mezzanine between there. But you will end up with double volume ceiling for one of the rooms so you need to consider this. The car porch roof height need not follow the first floor ceiling height exactly even if you want it to be a car porch roof terrace. You could add steps to get out to the roof terrace if you want it to be higher. It all depends on how the architect designs the house and PE designs the structure I have a mezzanine floor like George as well. This creates a double volume ceiling for my living room which helps ventilate the living room as well as make it brighter and spacious. for your 3.1m, I’m not sure is it’s floor to floor or floor to ceiling. If it is floor to floor, the actual floor to ceiling will be much lower due to the beams and any false ceilings you may end up doing. Having such low ceiling for such a big area like a living room may make it feel claustrophobic

Well you can try calling aircon companies to see if anyone wants to buy. But do it before you handover the house

just let your builder dispose of them.

Soil investigation needs to be done based on instructions or requirements of a PE. So need to find a PE first and then find the SI firm. Yes you are correct that the potential builder can do the above first. But why would one want to spend time and effort to do something if he is not going to get the job in the end even though the builder could have quoted for just this scope of work? In the usual architect route, the architect is appointed and the PE appointed as well. Then the SI company is appointed and takes directions from the PE. Once the SI report is out, the PE designs the structure and the architect will call for tender based on the confirmed architectural and structural plans. In this manner, cost is confirmed and controlled right from the start and there should be any additional costs incurred unless something unexpected happened or owner requested for changes. the location and surroundings of the site usually only provides an estimate and is not a confirmation on what type of foundation can be done. One member had gotten an estimate from a builder as his site is near low lying area. Builder said need piling but the house ended up doing raft foundation as the site is on a high point near the low lying area. My own house is located on high ground. But I had to do footings as the original site was excavated massively when the whole area was developed and the developer back then backfilled the area with clayey soil. ultimately what type of foundation to be built is decided by the PE as he is the one who is putting his license on the line when the structural plans is submitted to BCA. We as layman can’t dispute the PE’s decision unless we get another PE to provide another opinion.

Architects would usually find 3 to 5 contractors to bid for the job. Of cos there will be contractors whom they had worked with before on previous jobs who are invited for the tender. Look at it this way. If the contractor isn’t up to par previously, would the architect invite him to bid for another job? The architect also won’t want problems with a problematic contractor as well right? honestly speaking, if the contractor has not meant to include foundation work in the original quotation, then all the items related to foundation should not be in the quotation in the first place. It’s like you go to a showroom to buy a car, then you want to upgrade to bigger rims and tyres and the car dealer tells you that the original quotation for the car didn’t cater for rims and tyres. if the contractor says the new footings are 3 times larger then original then I would ask for the original drawings to see what was the original estimated footings size. It is easy to calculate the additional materials required when you have the original and new structural plans to compare with. as mentioned, you are at the mercy of your contractor now. Whether the additional cost is reasonable or not doesn’t make a difference since you have signed the contract and such and don’t really have any other options to move forward besides accepting this new extra cost.

You need to have at least a PE who will determine the scope of the soil investigation. I sourced for my own SI company based on requirements specified by my PE. Also where to drill and when to stop drilling is also based on the PE’s instructions

Unfortunately you are at the mercy of your contractor now. So if you are unwilling to pay for the additional cost, you are just stuck with no way to move forward unless you want to terminate his contract and find someone else to take over and such. I don’t know how many footings you have for your house has but assuming there are 10, each footing will cost an additional 6k. For my house, I had to enlarge 2 of my footings and corresponding underground beams and I had to pay about 8k for this.

Your contract already catered for these items “RC structure for footing which also include formworks and raft foundation” which should form the footings and foundation already. So best is that you clarify with the builder on what these items are and the difference between these and the new footings they are charging you. Even if the new footings are larger than intended, it shouldn’t cost an additional 60k. I guess this is the risk you take when engaging a design and build contractor rather than going the architect route. With an architect, everything including structural design would have been confirmed before hand and the awarded contract would have no variations unless something unexpected happened or owner requested for changes.

Did you hire an architect or yours is a design and build contractor? check your contact with the builder and see the details on whether piling cost has already been covered in the contract you signed. If nothing has been signed then of cos the builder can adjust his cost for the contract. footings are big blocks of reinforced concrete with rebars inside sitting on the soil and these rebars will later on be joined to the underground beams to provide the foundation for the house. Piling is using piles driven into the soil until the piles reach the hard rock/soil layer and later on pile caps(similar to footings) are cast on top of the piles. there’s nothing wrong with using footings as foundation. The PE would have done all his calculations based on the soil investigation report and determined that footings will work well. My own house is built on footings as well. normally the PE should request for a plate bearing test once the house is demolished to verify and confirm that the house can be supported by the soil using footings. This test results need to be submitted to BCA and if the test passes, then there’s nothing to worry about using footings. as mentioned, check your contract/quotation with the builder. Normally foundation( footings, underground beams) would be classified under substructure. If cost had already been allocated for this in the original quotation, then the builder shouldn’t add on the 60k. But if nothing had been confirmed for this part, then 60k seems to be a fair amount in current context

you can search online for companies who does this type of lift and get a quotation from them. best is plan to have a granny room on the ground floor. if don't have and there is space, then renovate to carve out a granny room. alternative is to renovate to add a lift in the house. for new builts/reconstructions, cater for a lift. this will solve the issue of not needing a granny room on ground floor

If extend level 3 up to x2, you need a PE to confirm if the foundation can support the new beams and columns and roof for the 3 storey or not. If foundation can support, then no need to touch the foundation. If can’t support, then doesn’t make sense to just tear down level 2 and level 1 at X2 to do the foundation and then build up again. Might as well extend all the way to 2m or 3m from rear boundary already. staircase will be part of GFA so no difference have or don’t have. Once you extend the floor plate, it is counted as additional gfa. You want to use attic as rooms means you need to add a physical floor which will increase your cost as well if your house highest water point is beyond 125mrl or 25m above Singapore datum, you need a water tank somewhere due to low water pressure. It might be possible to shift the tank down but it will take up space which you may want to use for other purpose. This will also mean your house plumbing needs to be redesigned to accept the inlet from first floor rather than from the attic/roof.

Referring to your plans. Are you talking about extending level 3 up to gridline X2? If yes, then need to see whether the current foundation is able to take the load of additional structures for level 3 or not. If foundation isn’t strong enough, then level 2 and level 1 needs to be demolished to build the footings and underground beams in the soil. other option is to build the footings at 2m or 3m from rear boundary line and extend the house all the way to there. one problem you will face is how is an excavator going to be moved to the rear of the house to excavate the soil for foundation. Footings normally are around 1m below ground level so while it could be possible to excavate manually, it will take much longer than using a machine.

Not possible. Footing has to be done on the soil itself. Can’t add below existing floor unless excavation is done. foundation cost is maybe 10% to 15% of overall construction cost only. I’m basing on my total rebuilt costing.

whether need piling or not you need to refer to a PE as the PE will look at the structural plans and advise you accordingly. of cos if you need to do piling, then might as well extend as much as possible since the piling is a one time cost. but as mentioned, your house is on high ground so you may not need to do piling but can do footings which is much cheaper. but this depends on soil condition and what the PE decides on.

Open roof terrace means you need to build RC roof for your 3rd storey. Then you also need to plan for rain water down pipes to drain water somewhere when it rains. Also need to build stairs to assess unless your roof terrace is not meant to be assessable. Need to compare cost between RC roof terrace and normal roof but I suspect normal roof would be cheaper whether HS needed or not depends on SCDF. QP will need to consult SCDF on the requirements on whether need or not

No difference between class 1 and 2 apart from the project cost limit. suggest you find a builder to do your renovations as not all contractors have the experience to handle a landed housing job

What was shared is a section view. Elevation views show the outside facades only. my old plans from BCA also have section views even though the house was built in 1958/1959

you need a contractor with a builders license if you need to do extensions and such.

how much you want to extend? the backyard storage room at the rear does not look to have foundations done up (or the foundations are able to support upper storeys) so if you want to extend all the way to 2m or 3m from rear boundary, you most likely need to do proper foundations. since the house is on high ground (based on needing a water tank), you might be able to get away with raft foundation or some footings and need not do piling. since you need to tear down almost the whole rear sections in order to do the extension, you might not be able to qualify as an A&A anymore if based on 50% facade rule if you don't want to touch the main roof, then your 3rd storey extension may have to be lower such that a sloping roof can be built and joined below the existing main roof. roofing options are either RC roof, clay tiles, sheet metal roof, clay tile looking metal roof, and maybe a few more options. RC roof would be most expensive (if i'm not wrong). sheet metal roof may require slightly less slope than clay tile roof so your 3rd storey extension may be able to get some good internal height even if it's slightly lower. gutters are no longer allowed to be built so if your existing gutters are removed, you need to plan for how the rain water flows down from the roof. I can tell you that the amount of water that can flow down from the roof during a heavy downpour is no joke so proper planning is important in this aspect.

i'm using sheet metal roof with rockwool insulation, etc. basically same set up as my main roof. no heat issues even with full afternoon sun. basically if your set up does not have insulation materials, you will be faced with the heat passing through the roofing material. So glass roofs, polycarbonate roofs, etc will just transmit the heat through.

since it is for long term stay, i would suggest you design and built the house accordingly to what you and your family needs and don't need to think about resale value. the 2m side setbacks can be side gardens or external partial walkways to access the front/back without getting through the house. While 2m seems narrow, I have managed to squeeze a side garden with turfing strip and also a narrow 30cm walkway for my house in that 2m strip. this side garden serves as greenery as well as provide some privacy since i didn't built a brick boundary wall (i used fence instead) between me and my neighbour so that ventilation can flow through. your outdoor areas can also be your front yard as well and need not be the sides. try not to tile up the entire driveway as it may get very hot in the days and instead just tile what you need while leaving space for garden/turf. is your quotation for extension work? cos i see an item mentioning "extension". They are also proposing Timdek roofing sheets so do a search and see if you like the pattern of the roofing sheet or not. There's other patterns of metal roofing sheets if you don't like this pattern but of cos cost may vary. since you haven't signed anything, the builder also won't commit to anything and do more than what is necessary to close the deal. if your concern is about cost due to design changes, then you should appoint and architect first and do up the entire design before looking for a builder. in this manner, you will be able to see all the 3D renderings and finalised the design aspect. Then the builder will quote based on the tender specifications drawn up by the architect and there would be no dispute since the quotation is already based on finalised design. Also by calling a tender, all builders invited for the tender will quote in a standard itemised format drawn up by the architect and you can do a proper comparison as well.

contract from D&B contactor? if yes, no visuals means the architect isn't paid enough to do 3D renderings for you. detailed breakdown is common. normally should also specify materials to be used and how things are being done as well. eg: my architect specified what type of materials to use for my metal roof and the detailing of how the roof should be done as well. not sure if you get these details from a D&B company or not. anything my architect not familiar with will indicate as accordingly to specialist specifications and architect will work with the specialist (sourced by main con) to work out the details. the contract will indicate the max allowed price range for the flooring according to your selection. anything more than the price range means you need to top up. eg: $3psf for homogenous tiles. but if you see something from italy or spain which you like and costs $5 psf, you need to top up the amount. $3psf most likely limits you to selecting basic tiles from china or malaysia.

nothing much you can do except replacement.