So as expected, we changed our mind yet again. This morning, I emailed our tender presenter (TP) and told her that we would like to increase the cut to 9.0 instead of 8.8. This would in effect raise the house position 20cm. I figured that it was probably better to increase the house position and do everything we can to make sure the house doesn’t look sunk in rather than build the house, then see that it’s sunken in and regretting that we didn’t do everything we could to raise it higher.
If you’re not sure what the Cut Reduced Level is, here’s an example: According to the land surveyors report, our footpath is currently at 9.57m altitude (or elevation) while the rear was about 7.8m. Having the cut reduced level set at 8.8 means that the house will be built at the 8.8m level (between 9.57m and 7.8m). Raising it to 9.0 means the house will sit at a higher position so the slope to the garage from the footpath won’t be as steep and as a result (we hope) the house would look elevated.
Since 20cm was the maximum we could raise it according to our TP, that’s what we went for. She did say that it will require additional concrete beams inserted and therefore would cost us a few thousand dollars. As a result, we will just have to sacrifice the window to the rear of the house. Worst case scenario, we “accidentally” break the window and get it replaced with a clear window instead.
The facade we picked:
Comments