For Chris and Kim Tavajian, the search for a 21st Century home took them to a design some people thought had been left behind in the 1970s.
Instead of a sumptuous ranch house or grand Colonial, they settled on a split-level. Their favorite attribute: sight lines.
“I liked the more open feel, and I like that I can see everything that is happening throughout the house,” said Chris Tavajian, of their new home in Lake in the Hills. “Between the kitchen and the family room, living room, the stairs up and down, you can see it all.”
The family, which includes three children, is hardly alone in turning to the split-level, which for a while seemed like an anachronism.
At the height of its popularity, the split-level was hailed as an alternative to the ranch because the design saved thousands of acres of valuable property.
The argument was fine, but they applied as well to the Colonial, the next wave of popular style. In fact, because the Colonial design can save even more land, it soon became a dominant presence in the housing market. In simple terms, a Colonial is simply a house with two stories stacked one atop the other, of equal size.
Why then the revival of the split-level?
The appeal is simple. In a split-level, a lot of space is included on the main floor, with only a few steps up or down to reach the rest of the house.
Richard Green, a professor of Real Estate with the University of Wisconsin at Madison said that typically, the split-level offers three or four rooms of primary living space on the entry level.
Climb three to five steps, and you’ve reached a floor where you’ll find bedrooms and full baths.
Descending a few steps below the entry level leads to a full-sized family room and often an additional bed and bath.
The efficiency of the split-level, in terms of costs, is beyond dispute.
“The design tends to be more efficient, because the house is enclosing the same amount of volume with less space above ground,” said architect Al Bloom of Bloom and Fiorino Architects Inc., Oakbrook Terrace.
Builder Anthony Pasquinelli said that in a split level the cost of drywall and carpeting might be only $10,000 to add 600 to 800 feet of living space.
“When you compare that to a new two-story home where you’re paying $80 to $120 per square foot, you can see how inexpensive the split-level is to finish,” Pasquinelli said.
He says his company reintroduced the split-level nearly 15 years ago and said the home style never really disappeared.
“We really never stopped building them. You can take a space half below grade and finish it off for a lot less than another area in a two-story house,” Pasquinelli said.
The biggest expenses in a house, in terms of materials, are the foundation and the roofing, said Dan Regan, president of Oak Builders Inc. in Glen Ellyn.
“With a two-story, you’re talking 8 to 9 feet of concrete foundation and all the roof to cover that. The split-level requires only four-foot concrete walls and four feet of what we call `knee walls’,” he said.
According to Pasquinelli, the construction pyramid shows that ranch-style homes are the most expensive to build, followed by the two-story, and then the split-level.
Beyond these economic advantages, some argue that the re-emergence of the split-level reflects a change in consumers’ tastes.
“I kind of disagree with those who feel the split-level is back because people maybe can’t afford a two-story or because it’s a better value,” said Dave Smith, vice-president of marketing and product development for Cambridge Homes, which is building a split-level model known as the Easton at Prairie Pointe near Round Lake.
“A lot of people didn’t see the split-level for a while, and so it’s something new for them. It’s a home that fits their style and needs.”
Paul Lehman, president of Macom Inc., a Naperville-based residential land developer, says there is some local resistance to the split-level among buyers.
“At least in Naperville, it’s a question of economics, but not in the way most people think,” Lehman said. “It’s true that the split-level is the one of the most economical uses of space. But the market here is more upscale and people can afford to have all their major rooms on the same floor.”
As for the Tavajians, neither of them grew up in a split-level home, but Chris Tavajian wishes he had.
The couple enjoys the space the house has afforded their three daughters — Brooke, 10; Hannelore, 3; and Amalia, 10 weeks.
Their new house, a split-level built by Pasquinelli, “is about 2,200 square feet, but it feels more like it’s 2,600 or 2,700-square feet,” he said.
Pasquinelli said the big, formal dining or living room is giving way to more living space.
Green agrees that dining rooms are losing their charm, as well as bedrooms, which may be less important now that people are having smaller families.
“There are also more people working out of their homes than before and making a split-level area below the entryway into an office or business area,” Green said.
———-
Split-level homes
Attractions
– The house has a lot of space on its main floor, with only a few steps needed to go up or down.
– Visibility is great, enabling a person on the main level to see what is happening elsewhere.
– A split-level saves on land costs and requires a less expensive foundation and roof.
Points to ponder
– Those who don’t like the design find it unattractive.
– Some say it uses more land than a Colonial.