Stone or stucco, which is more expensive?
12/6/2017 at 2:03:44 PM
We are building a new 2400 sqft bungalow in the Ottawa area. Initially, We were planning to use stucco all around. However, I am now thinking I would like to have stone, at least in the front with the other 3 sides stucco. I love the old century homes and would like to recreate this look. However, I think it would be way too expensive to just use stone.
So what is the least expensive, all stucco or a combination of stone and stucco?
Thank you
12/14/2017 at 9:12:33 AM
Stucco is the cheaper of the two buy far. Brick and stone are about the same bit that really depends on the products and how they are installed. You can get cultured ( fake ) stone that just hangs on the side of the house or real stone that's set with traditional mortar, which is much more expensive.
Most builders will use a combination of the two to keep costs down but achieve the high end look. Like stone on the front only or stone on the bottom few feet all around the house with stucco up the remaining wallls.
To get a true cost you'll have to have some contractors come by. You can be at 20K or 75K , it all depends.
James
Search the TrustedPros directory and discover the best contractors in your area.
Find your home service pro
