Lauer

Yes. In addition, whether you could add an attic depends firstly on the height limit for landed in your area, and secondly the plot ratio for the building. When there is no height limit issue, the GFA you could add with an attic is not necessarily the maximum allowable based on the plot ratio. It is pretty much an architecture issue. To illustrate, let's say the land size is 2000 sqf, plot ratio is 1.5, so this gives us 3,000 sqf GFA allowable. And let's say the total GFA of the existing 1st and 2nd storeys totaled 2,000 sqf, we wouldn't be able to add 1,000 sqf GFA for the attic. The reasons are: - one side of the roof would rest on the attic floor at the back of the house, while the other side of the roof would open to the open terrace at the front of the house. This opening has a height limit of not lower than 2.1m if I remember correctly, - where the side of roof resting on the attic floor, because of the pitch of the roof, the floor space of the area below 1.8 m (if I remember correctly) is considered 'non-accessible' by BCA and therefore not counted as part of the GFA - the maximum height of the attic floor would be 5 m, but exactly how high it would be built is an architecture issue. Meaning, how the new roof would look like from the outside, in relation to the entire look of the house. If you are using clay roof title instead of metal roof, then BCA also has a guideline related to the minimum pitch allowable for the roof, 12 degree (if I remember correctly) to prevent back flow of rainwater. Cheers!

If I am not wrong, we discussed your case before. Not trying to create fear, but if I were you I would very seriously review the whole thing to see if I would proceed furtherr using this team(s). Add up the money you paid, plus other liability due when terminating the contract, and compare with the total cost, then decide. Adding a floor is not simple from the construction process point of view; I mean, it is far easier to build a 3rd storey when it is a rebuilding, but not so for reconstruction. There would likely be reinforcement needed on the existing building to support the weight of an additional floor. You would need a very experienced, reliable builder to do this, not some IDs who now is the boss for whatever builder he is using. Safety is paramount. I took a quick look at the cost, $63,000 for the floor plus HS, your ID must be kidding you. For certain, this number would jump when you proceed. I have nothing against IDs, but have mentioned so many times in this forum, don't use an ID for this kind of project. I think I wrote somewhere about my ID, a brilliant guy, who messed up a project like this for another client. Good luck!

Yes, 75K is way over the top. A rate of 7 or 8% of the construction cost would be reasonable. In my view, never ever engage an ID to do A&A, let alone reconstruction. IDs are not QPs. Cheers!

You do have telecom/power cables running underground to where your DB locates. But if these cables are meant for your neighbor's, then the situation is tricky. Get your lawyer to deal with it, unless you are a lawyer. Cheers!

What you are thinking to do, is an illegal alteration. I know that many people did it anyway. The other option is to remove the floor tile, sanitize the soil, and plant some trees. Cheers!

Hi, As roofing structure is constructed at the later stage, (the building is constructed upwards), it is not too late to accommodate for an openable skylight. So, instead of a fixed skylight, which is basically consisting of a glass panel, you could opt to install an openable skylight, which is a window installation. It is far more expensive than a fixed skylight obviously, maybe about $3,000+ for a small one, but I could assure you that the money would be well spent. The way the air flow the moment the skylight window is being opened could be amazing. There are many brands, for example Velux, and also get the electrical version so that you could open the skylight window with a remote control. Cheers!

No la, I am just here to assist where possible... The terraced house is of course a British import; you could find the highest concentration of terraced housing in England, of all parts of the world. In England, you could observe that a typical terraced house is hardly more than 13m long, because the law required ample natural lighting for a dwelling. With a suitably sized window, natural lighting could only reach about 5m into a room from the window. So, where you have a room infront and then a room at the back, with a typical staircase in between, we would have a measurement of (5m + 2m + 5m) = 12m for the length of British terraced house, where the staircase also serves to facilitate cross ventilation. And in England, where the Summer temperatures hardly go beyond 26 celsius, one would hardly feel suffocating inside a room. But not so in a tropic like Singapore, where the conditions are hot and humid most of the year, with monsoon rains breaking the heat. And yet, we could find in these conditions, terraced housing that is typically far longer than the British's 13m length. Of course, this is just a modern development. In the original, older terraced 1-storey, there is indeed the sensible courtyard, or airwell, that facilitates natural lighting and ventilation for a longer terraced. As more and more of this gets rebuilt, the courtyards disappeared from the landscape. I personally found it miserable walking into a terraced needing artificial lighting, while the sun shone brightly outside, not to mention breathing stale air inside. The architects, they are very pro-client. As long as you are happy, they don't really raise what I wrote above. Afterall, they don't live in the house. Also, most are pretty much unmotivated to design well for a terraced. When we look at a semi-d, it has a side where all the windows are placed, so there is no issue with natural lighting and ventilation. Now, if you could have the semi-d in a cardboard model, and you fold-in the side where the windows are, there the folded-in area would essentially become the courtyard in a terraced. It is conceptually very simple, a terraced design that could achieve the livability of semi-d. Within the courtyard, a suitable tree (depending on the house orientation, and the amount of sunlight captured with the courtyard), could grow 10m high. You could have 1 or 2 of the rooms with small balcony/balconies protruding into the courtyard. Very interesting to look at inside a terraced like this, although there is nothing much you could do outside, as it has only one facade. Just my 2-cents... Cheers!

I agree, having seen something similar from a "Miss Wang". Cheers!

For terraced, it is the architect's top priority to design for adequate natural lighting and ventilation. When we speak of natural ventilation, it refers to the necessary openings to allow air to flow in and out. This is not the same as having numerous fans stirring basically stale (and heated up) air within a house. Generally, for adequate natural lighting and ventilation, there could be 2 models for terraced: - The house is about 13m long. You could typically find this in cluster terraced design; The Greenwood, Luxus Hill etc - A courtyard (airwell) in between. You mentioned having skylights, which allow natural lighting to come through. I supposed that it would help slightly with natural ventilation, but not much, as hot air rises but traps in the area underneath the skylights' glass panels. So, I am slightly curious as to why you are getting feedback from a forum, but not having them addressed by the architect, as it sounds like the house has been designed and is undergoing the construction? Just my 2-cents... Cheers!

If the 1-storey building configuration meets your requirement, the of course it should be it lah... Also, be aware that the market for FH landed, the asking price for the land of smaller plot is higher. For example, the asking price for a typical 2000sqf is about $1,250 psf, whereas it is about $1,350 psf for a 1600 sqf plot. Everything being equal, that is, both consist of an original dwelling and in similar locations. The game of lower quantum sum has indeed appeared in the landed sector. Now, for the case of 2200 sqf, the value of the original building could be just $200,000 or so (ask the bank). Surely there would be some degree of refurbishments, interior decoration etc before you move in, so be prepared to write off this sum when you are selling in future. Unless the next buyer also wants an original building. Regarding being dwarfed, in my view, it is not really important. You live your life, your neighbors live theirs. Cheers!

Sorry to hear about that, but I couldn't see how you would want the sewage work to be done by another other than your building contractor? Why do you want to divert the sewage line again? Are you the one who intended to build a lap pool? Cheers!

Did your contractor explain to you why he couldn't do it? The boundary line of the house starts at the line where the pillar aligned with the abutting walls. Which means that, at the driveway, the land outside this boundary line belongs to the state. To widen the driveway, permission needs to be obtained from LTA. Correct me if this is inaccurate, I believe that LTA placed a 4.0m limitation to the width of the driveway. Now, normally there would be a public drain just outside this boundary line, which channels the rainwater from the road to whereever it should go. When you widen the driveway, the culvert would need to be widen as well, in order to carry the load of the car going in and out of the house. To modify the culvert, permission needs to be obtained from PUB. The cost of modifying the culvert could be substantial, as it is a RC structure. Now, normally the utility lines (telecom, power, gas, water) run under the public drain or the existing culvert, so maybe these would have to be shifted as well. To do so, permissions are required from the telecom provider, SP Power, PUB etc. All submissions would need to be handled by a QP, so there is the fees for the QP as well. But assuming that you are willing to go through all these and pay the costs, there is this difficulty or inconvenience of trying to park another car in the driveway. My neighbor opposite, they park 2 cars in the driveway. It is almost daily sideshows for me, every morning and evening, to watch how they maneuver the cars in and out. But another neighbor, who also park 2 cars inside, don't have to do any maneuvering at all. Each car is free to go in and out without bothering the other car. Why so? That is because his house is built with a longer front setback of more than 7.5m. Just my two-cents. Cheers!

Right. And a nice family you have with 4 generations together, and a few pets...Given the situation, there is no doubt that a rebuild is easier, as it faces less constraint. (Having said so, I would clarify that I am not a fan of A&A or reconstruction, if you read my other posts). Now, whether it is to raise the floor level of the front (which means that there would be a few steps to climb before reaching the main door), or to lower the back (excavation, garden destroyed etc as you mentioned) to me it is an architectural design issue, an issue more to do with how the new building would look in relation to your neighbors. Or neighborhood. I have not studied the relevant bylaws regarding underground HS, but I would attempt to locate the HS below ground. So, if lowering the back is feasible (means that you could excavate all you what without constrains from the public sewage pipe or rainwater drain), then might as well locate the HS there. Afterall the HS is RC structure. Regarding the 4.5m height, do take note that the net height achievable is lesser than that, because of the floor slab, the beam, and utility piping etc so do check with the architect. Regarding the budget, if I were you then I wouldn't want the design of the building to be too constrained by it. Afterall, the rebuilding is to solve the requirement of an expanded or expanding household, so there is no point pouring in a constrained amount of money but still not meeting the requirement. I would think that most of the equity of the existing house is derived from the land value, so if budget is a constraint then maybe you could consider getting a loan from the house's equity. I wrote a post somewhere in this forum on how a rebuilding would increase the equity of a landed property, so I wouldn't repeat this subject here. Good luck to your project. Cheers!

It seems to me that how you should approach this issue, it pretty much depends on where you come from. Is this a new purchase? Cheers!

If I were in your circumstance, then I wouldn't consider a new erection on the A&Aed house. Whether it is for now or 5 years later. The total cost (the original A&A cost, ID cost, and the new erection cost) would probably add up to the new erection cost of a semi- d. The option could be to sell the existing landed, and acquire another one for a new erection. Just sit down and run through the cashflow analysis and you would see what I mean. Recently, I have seen so many landed developments where every inch of the lands is cemented over. Pretty interesting preference, considering the charm of a landed house is pretty much derived from the garden landscape. If you are one of those who avoid the gardening, then I would suggest acquiring a landed of 1600 sqf or so for the new erection. Cheers! (Just checking if the video gets posted ...)

It is not necessarily true that the upper unit would bear 100% of the repair, as described in the judgement of: http://www.mnd.gov.sg/stb/judgment/archive/2004/STB_33_of_2004_-_The_Waterside_(6_Aug_2005).pdf You could apply to MND to hear a case. I don't know if you could do so without a lawyer. But do exhaust all avenues via the MC before applying. http://app.mnd.gov.sg/stb/Applications/TypesofApplications.aspx Cheers!

This is a subject that an owner could encounter when rebuilding a landed, especially where it is located in older landed housing estate. So, I would add my thoughts here; other please comment if there is anything incorrect written. I would think that, where an existing house is constructed with the boundary line beyond the rear fence, the owner should attempt to repossess the land between the rear fence and the boundary line. Otherwise, after a number of years this area could well be possessed by your back neighbor without having to pay a compensation (if my understanding of the relevant law is correct). In this situation (although without the benefit of the measurements), the owner has two options: - Appy to extend the rear fence to the boundary line. In this case, the open public drain would of course come inside his landed area (it has been in this first place), so his side walls flanking the nighbors' would have side gates allowing PUB access, which is a PUB requirement. (However, I have seen houses where these side walls are without the side gates and I don't know if the owners sealed the walls after a PUB inspection.) I would think that conceptually it is still possible to extend the back wall when the public drain is also shared with the back neighbor, assuming that the land is continuous without a drop. There is a bylaw controlling where the rear wall and the rear fence should be constructed in this case, in term of the distance from the public drain. - Apply to reroute the drain to connect with the house's RWDP (Rain Water Down Pipe). To illustrate, assuming that the water in the public drain runs from left to right of the landed, the public drain that ends at the left neighbor's boundary wall is connected to the RWDP. So, effectively the existing public drain is eliminated. However, by doing so, the owner bears the risk of a choke that would require the opening up to access the concealed RWDP, for PUB to clear the choke. Therefore, this approach is considered only if the house is the corner unit where the public drain originates. Your architect would be able to advise in more details these options. Cheers!

You are welcomed. So now you should know where to look out for to negotiate. Most people would tend to negotiate on reducing the costing of the 13 items, for example, the price of the air-conditioner, by swapping one brand to another. Or by reconfiguring its capacity. But the total cost of the 13 items constitutes only about 25% of the building cost, so these items shouldn't be the focus. Moreover, these items have a great impact on how the building would eventually look. If you were to replace the marble with homogeneous tile for the living and dining area, the look and feel would be different? The $200,000 figure for the wet works for each storey is just a guesstimate, as I don't know the proposed architecture for your house, the build-in space for each storey etc. Just 4 years ago, you could get a pricing range of $90-$110 psf for the wet works, or $90,000-$110,000 for a space of 1000 sqf. Earlier last year, I heard that the pricing has gone to $150-$170 psf. And then it kept going up throughout the year. You could read the headline news today, on the higher labor cost impacting building contractors. Also, you could discover that contractors would price the wet work $psf higher for a terrace than a semi-d, for example, because most of them don't like to do a terrace. It is true that the building process is somewhat less effient for a terrace, being flanked by 2 neighbors. If the neighbors are nice, then they wouldn't mind the workers to step on their roofs occasionally. But some neighbors would mind, to the extent of calling in the police to complain of the infringement. (Be very friendly, and attentive, to your neighbors during the construction, ok?) Cheers!

And for the music break, a song by George Harrison, released in 1967 I think. And an interview with him just after the breakup of The Beatles... Enjoy!

Lol...Yes, but GST is normally not part of the construction contract, and to be paid by the owner. I have a quick (some said lazy) way of costing a building, by apportioning each of the items listed below at $20,000: 1. Air-conditioner 2. Carporch cover, steel beams and glass with trellis 3. Timber and glass doors 4. Timber flooring for bedrooms 5. Marble flooring for living and dining areas 6. Tiles for bathrooms, kitchen and outdoor areas 7. Glass works for partition, bathrooms, staircase areas 8. Clay tiles for roof, sunscreen for open trellis 9. Electrical works 10. Sanitary & plumbing works 11. Bathroom sanitary fixtures and kitchen sinks 12. All windows 13. False ceilings and painting So we have a total of 13*$20,000= $260,000 here for these items. Of course, some items, such as Electrical etc, would be more than $20K but the point is to group the big tickets and assign a cost. And the cost of building each storey (the floor slabs, the columns and beams; the cement, bricks and steel rebars, the drywalls etc) should be about $200K, so when you have 3.5 storeys that would be 4*$200,000=$800,000. Others please comment on their ways of costing? Cheers!

At $1.1 mil for 3600 sqf, it gives us just over $300 psf. This pricing is OK for me, considering that yours is a terraced and for 3.5-storeys as well. Of course, pricing is just one part of the equation; there are also other factors to consider especially the reputation of the builder, etc. The budget of $800K, at $220 psf, I would say that it is slightly unrealistic for the type of house you are building. Cheers!

But you wrote that you bought it for a rebuild? If the question is whether the value of a landed is better enhanced with a rebuilding, then it depends on how much you paid for the landed. 1700 sqf for the land or built-in? If the question is whether $1.1 mil is a good price for a 3.5-storeys, then it all depends on the design & material proposed. For example, is it a full 3.5-storeys or a 2.5-storeys with basement? Cheers!

Of course, all that you have wrote above made perfect sense, but only to you. You might as well go and challenge why the alphabet 'A' should be labelled as 'A', why not labelled as 'Z'? Or, why the number '1' should be labelled as '1', and why 1+1 should be 2 and not 4? No? There is something really disturbing about you. I would have thought that, for someone who has gone through the classical FS, Bazi texts, therre he should have gained greater insights about the subjects. Unfortunately not so. It is like a child who couldnt yet overcome the fact that 1+1=2 and therefore has since been struggling with it. And the child is 49-years old. Cheers!

Hey, Happy New Year. Everybody also huat arh. Never mind la...Speaking of song, here is a song from Jacky for everyone. Enjoy!

You like to give everyone a label, don't you? Ivy is given the label Queen, KC the King (I suspect?), and now me the Chairman? I re-read Mae's short post and still found hers much clearer than your lengthy postings. I suspect that, to you, for a consumer consulting a FSM, he first would need to get a degree in FS, Bazi etc, in order to understand what the FSM is going to say. What you wrote belongs to the territory of the FSM, a consumer wouldn't bother with it. I could imagine the scenario where you are the FSM, pulling out all these details and laying them in front of a customer, and basically say..."here, to understand what I am saying, you need to understand all these details...". You don't find this scenario hilarious? And that is not the end of it. At the end, you would tell the customer..."by the way, my wife and I seriously choong etc etc", therefore implying that what you just told the customer don't work, at least in your case? Cheers!