bungalows vs houses

[David]

Hi All, Ok, I realise this is a bit off topic, but I reckon that you home-loving guys and girls might have a view on this so I thought I'd ask anyway.

Basically I'm a first time buyer considering buying a 2 bedroom bungalow property in a pleasant area. [Of course, we could have endless discussion on the state of the current housing market but let's not go there (unless you want to)]. Anyway, I would pay a bit of a premium for the bungalow because of the convenience of the location and the quietness of the area, and I could probably get a 3 bedroom semi-detached house in a less desirable area for the same money which would give me more space. The estate is primarily occupied by pensioners although there are a few young and middle-aged couples on the estate. I've been getting a bit of a 'ribbing' from my mates for considering a 'granny-home', although on most practical grounds the property seems to be well matched although not having lived on my own before it's a bit difficult to tell how quickly or not I'd use the available space. Extending into the loft would be a long-term option if required - the current owners have already had architects plans for this.

What do you think?. What are the pros/cons of purchasing a bungalow vs buying a traditional 2 storey property for 30-something singleton such as myself?. Any other comments or suggestions are gratefully received.

Dave

[Tim S]

Nowt wrong with a bungalow - make gutter cleaning, roof repairs, chimney wibblings all do-able with relative ease.

Tim

[Dave Baker]

Bungalow or not, go for the detached property every time. They tend to increase in value faster, no problems with noisy or inconsiderate neighbours or shared maintenance issues (gutters, drains, fences, chimneys, roofs) on the other side of the party wall like with a semi. Also with a bungalow, although the total square footage per pound might be less than a 2 storey property you tend to get a bigger sense of space, longer corridors etc because it's all on one floor. I can promise you that a pokey semi with half the footprint but the same total area on 2 floors will feel like a shoebox compared to the bungalow.

Bungalows are also great for maintenance. No upstairs windows or gutters to clean and paint for example. Everything you need to get to can be reached on a stepladder. Also, because of the large floor area, they tend to have lots of loft space and lofts high enough to walk around in which you won't get with the semi. Great for storage which keeps the actual living area uncluttered and even more spacious. The loft in my semi is only high enough for a midget to walk into so I have to crawl in on my hands and knees to store anything.

Plumbing and wiring is more simple because there aren't two floors to negotiate.

Finally they're very flexible because any room can become a bedroom, tv room or office at a moments notice and then be turned back again. On 2 floors it always tends to be very divided into upstairs = sleeping and downstairs = living.

The main reason we have multi storey and linked properties is lack of land and hence high land prices. Where land is cheap like in Scotland you get more bungalows and far fewer semis.

Bungalow every time. You won't regret it.

-- Dave Baker Puma Race Engines

Camp USA engineer minces about for high performance specialist (4,4,7)

[Peter Crosland]

Ignore the ribbing and do what YOU want! Personally I have lived in one for fifteen years of necessity but I would never go back to a two story dwelling because of the convenience of being able to swap the use of rooms around easily even if I had the choice. The downside is that you have a larger roof area that means higher heating losses but if you put a good amount of insulation in this can be largely overcome. Maintenance is easier because most jobs can be done from low steps.

Peter Crosland

[Mary Fisher]

Why can't you do that in a house?

That doesn't mean that it has to be, it's only convention.

Mary

[TheOldFellow]

I live in a bungalow now (retired, see), but I've owned a lot of houses. The other posts say the right things. The only thing to add is that for the same living area a bungalow has twice as much roof - hence the heating can be a tad more expensive unless the insulation is well done.

R.

[John Rumm]

I guess it comes down to what you prefer. How used to "going upstairs" to sleep are you? Some people find adjustment to life on the ground floor a bit difficult.

DIY is often simpler on a bungalow, and demand is usually good when you want to sell it.

[R D S]

Where do I sign?

[Steven Briggs]

In message , David writes

As a 30 something singleton living in a three bed bungalow - they're great!. Dave Baker's got it spot on - easy maintenance & DIY, better sense of space, huge usable loft (really ought not to put any _more_ stuff up there), quiet neighbours, and as few bungalows have been built since, what, 70's, they're often in mature areas and sought after when you come to sell.

[Owain]

Because most people want the bathroom, or at least a loo, on the same floor as their bedroom, and in the case of someone infirm it's pretty much essential. Likewise people usually want the dining room on the same floor as the kitchen, unless they have a maid and/or a service lift.

Owain

[Owain]

Bungalows are usually a bit more expensive than a house of the same floor area, because they have a larger plot size and because there are fewer of them.

I'd be grateful for somewhere quiet and ned-free.

You will, you will :-) And you can always get a lodger in for a year or two to help pay the mortgage and fund some DIY work.

*Excellent* way of adding value (on the assumption that planning permission is available, and the upstairs includes a shower room/loo). If similar properties in the area have had lofts converted that's a very good sign.

All sounds good to me.

Owain

[HLAH]

"John Rumm" wrote .

Dependant on how far down the evolutionary road they are, maybe? ;-)

H

[Mary Fisher]

The ideal for me would be to have a lav on all floors and one outside. I've never wanted much but this would have been wonderful when the children were young (and we couldn't afford it). All those years of queues outside the door and everyone with crossed legs :-(

I know several people who have their sitting rooms on the first floor, one of our daughters was one. We had a friend who had his bedrooms in the cellar and one of our sons did while he lived in Germany. My workroom cum office is on the first floor. Spouse does his spinning in the loft.

The kitchen/dining room point is valid, some are combined and some have hatches. Ours are completely separate but I wouldn't want them to be on different floors. In the summer we eat most meals outdoors, it involves a lot of traipsing to the bottom of the garden and back but we don't mind. That doesn't mean that bedrooms and sitting rooms couldn't share floors with other rooms.

We're too conventional. We've occasionally lived Dark Age style in one long room which served as everything, it's quite convenient. All on one level of course but open plan taken to the ultimate :-) And I'm reminded of a family who live in a yurt in Scotland, same thing really.

The space taken up by bungalows and same floor area houses is the crunch, as someone said. I wouldn't want to sacrifice any garden space.

Mary

[Mary Fisher]

...

Doesn't that negate the advantages of a bungalow?

Mary

[Bob Eager]

I knew a woman who lived on her own, and she'd moved it all round. She lived upstairs and slept downstairs. Everything reversed, except the bathroom. She said the view was better.

My office is in one of the large first floor bedrooms, and I can see the street and front door pretty well from my desk. It's north facing, so no excessive light on the screen, and not too hot in summer. If working at home it's a pleaseant place to be.

As for kitchen/dining room on different floors, I remember an article on Stirling Moss's hi-tech house (don't remember if he still has it). The dining table lived in the kitchhen, and was laid up with everything down there. Press of a button, and it rose through the ceiling, into the dining room.

[Mary Fisher]

That's true.

Just like mine - except that it doesn't overlook the street but the garden.

LOL!

Mary

[AlanC]

I had often though that having a bungalow would make DIY easier. The only thing that put me off was security. In the summer months when it gets hot, we normally sleep with all the bedroom windows open to get some air movement through the rooms to help cool us down. I wouldnt be able to sleep at night with our bedoom window within easy reach of some passing s**m-bag, never mind all the bedroom windows. At night we have the house alarm on part set, covering all the downstairs. This allows us and the kids free movement upstairs (we have an upstairs loo!).

If there is a fire then a bungalow would be handy. Any window (as long as it opens far enough) would be an easy escape route.

Alan

[Owain]

No, because you still have the ground floor bedroom and bathroom which appeal to the bungalow market.

Owain

[David Hansen]

On Tue, 7 Nov 2006 11:30:49 -0000 someone who may be "Mary Fisher" wrote this:-

Caulke Abbey. From memory, at one time food was put in a heated trolley in the kitchen and transported down a corridor that was either underground or semi-sunken. From there it was put in a lift and taken to first floor level. There it was kept in a heated cabinet in an ante-room (though this may have been at corridor level). It was then brought out into the dining room.

That was in the days when the cook had a room above the kitchen. As family circumstances became more and more reduced the whole operation shrunk down until the former ante-room became the kitchen and dining room.

[Mary Fisher]

That would make the food better! I hate it kept warm.

Mary

>