We probably can't afford to get 2 storeys built at the moment but don't want to close off that option for future years (when we may want an extra bedroom). We are thinking of a timber-framed extension for environmental reasons: trying to avoid too much concrete. Thanks.

  • If you remember Senator Ted Stevens, he got into trouble because of who paid for it, but his solution was to raise his home and build a story under it then lower it down and make it one home. The place is beautiful. Have you considered doing that instead? – SDsolar Jul 2 '17 at 3:51

Can you - yes - with the application of sufficient money, anything is possible.

Will it be cost-effective - probably not. Building, and then destroying a roof is a very expensive proposition. Removing roof framing and replacing it with an additional floor, likewise.

If you wanted to do this in a way that might make fiscal sense, have the frame designed as a two-story frame, but leave the 2nd floor out at first. It will cost somewhat more than a single-story, but it can actually be built out later without costing an absurd amount of money.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.