Can anyone comment on this pipedream? Would it be possible to first support the existing ceiling (if the interior walls don't support it), tear off the attic, then sister the new trusses to the existing ceiling joists? Would that be more or less work? Electrical wires could be a bitch.
You should read the rest of his posts. It sounds like it is feasable, at least from the information we have. The ceiling is 2x6's not
2x4's. It's a small house so the first floor rooms are going to be small. That means the spans are probably short. And the option of adding additional steel posts in the basement is involved as well. I think it's doable. As to the $17k, that doesn't shock me.jamesgangnc wrote: ...
And I'm saying there's more to being sure of adequacy of the modified overall structure than simply deciding how to hang a set of upper floor joists and OP's clearly trying to "cheap out" and hope for the best.
We have absolutely no way of knowing what the foundation is, what the columns in the basement are resting upon, what the tie collars are like if they exist, etc., etc., etc.
Yes, a "competent general contractor" can tell some of this but may (or may not) have the expertise to evaluate the effect of the proposed modifications on the overall structure.
I've seen enough build perfectly adequate new structure on inadequate existing that I'd not be willing to make that as a recommendation to OP. There was, in fact, published in FHB a year or so ago a similar modification to an existing house done by a contractor. I noticed some weaknesses in what was done that are very common but the "obvious" way to make the additions/modifications at relatively minimal cost and requiring minimal modification to the existing structure. Interestingly, an issue or two later were two letters from licensed structural engineers pointing out the structural weaknesses inherent in the modification as implemented. I can foresee such issues in OP's desired plan of action. Granted, it ain't foregone that it will but it surely isn't wise to leap w/o adequate design.
And, as noted, if there is a permit required in OP's jurisdiction, it may not be adequate to try that route, anyway.
I'm simply trying to make sure to avoid the potential train wreck...
--
dpb wrote: ...
And by that I mean the existing may have been perfectly adequate until the new was added for which the combination was then _not_.
--
Sure, I'm just saying that a good contractor should be able to handle this. It does not absolutely require an engineer. It's just a 22' by
24' structure. I would expect the contractor to be able to articulate how he planned to carry the load down to the foundation.You guys sure are doom and gloom a lot, sheesh.
A) Is nothing to add over what you said before and I'll reiterate the observation the good contractor can do the building, sure...whether the good contractor is also able to determine the ability of the existing building may begin to stretch his ability to take standard framing practice and apply it.
B) _THAT'S_ not the question...do you know there's enough foundation for essentially doubling the house? Are you confident enough that any good general contractor is sufficiently trained to risk your $20k+ on his look-see?
No, realistic.
I'm saying prudence is generally a wise investment...and certainly anybody that would ask for opinions of such a move on usenet needs some imo (altho I'll note OP only asked about costs, but that's generally also a bad sign for getting the truly "good general contractor" when start going for lowest cost.
--
...
And, my last comment I'll make--I wouldn't expect it to be but a few hundred bucks for an opinion on feasibility and suggestions for incorporation assuming the project conception is, indeed, a reasonable one for the structure.
I'd think that quite a reasonable investment either way before making a major commitment.
--
You think you are going to get an engineer out to look at a site and evaluate a design for a couple hundred bucks?
I'm in the middle of a similar project myself. I started off not wanting to waste money on an engineer. Trust my competent GC instead. But then the planning officer queried a couple of elements of the design and I got the engineer out - holy cow, good job I did. Suffice it to say I am now having to rebuild the roof and top floor walls completely. Lucky the roof didn't land on my head when we had all that snow this winter.
$17k seems cheap to me. I'm in MN, and local trades are slow, willing to price their time pretty keenly. My project's about 40% bigger than yours, and I'm looking at around $33k for a comparable package (I've deducted windows and siding). Roughly half is labor. I also intend to do all the interior finishing, insulation myself (that'll still cost me a few grand, maybe 5). If you go into your local Menards or equivalent, they'll help you put a material list together. I normally underestimate waste removal ($360 for a 20 yard demo load here, and I will need 4-5), permit fees, equipment rental (including crane to lift the roof trusses) and consumables like nails, blades, etc. Wow, $17k definitely seems low to me. He's not building any contingency in there. Is he reliable/trustworthy? Do a service magic request and get at least 3 more quotes.
Good luck, and let us know how things proceed.
And if he has trusses built (or not) may be able to turn it 90degrees on top of the ceiling joists.
Yea, the manufactured truss solution would appeal to me as well. A local supplier would likely already have some engineered gambrel truss designs on hand for that span.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.