Hello,
we are currently looking at plot number 55 from the attached site plan. At the moment, it is an old sports field, and the plots are still being developed and prepared. We visited the site to take a look. The concern is about the slope and the symbols indicating usage boundaries, etc.
I spoke with the seller, and he said that you could easily gain or level out about 4.5 meters (15 feet), though not all of it, because there is a neighboring plot below for infiltration purposes and a green belt has to be maintained as well. However, I am not sure what is actually realistic and especially what additional costs we need to plan for, since this is already at the upper limit of our plot budget.
You can see that it slopes quite steeply down – the seller mentioned something about using 1-meter (3 feet) L-shaped retaining walls being allowed, but I’m not sure if that is a requirement or just his advice. What do you think? What options are there? Maybe one or two more terraced levels? It doesn’t all have to be at the highest level on top.
What do these circles mean? According to the legend, they mark usage boundaries. Does that mean nothing can be done there, or that it probably has to be planted?
Even if you have a plan, you still have to buy everything, and it can be rejected again during the building permit / planning permission process, right? How can you be sure before buying that you can do what you’re planning?
Thanks in advance!!!
we are currently looking at plot number 55 from the attached site plan. At the moment, it is an old sports field, and the plots are still being developed and prepared. We visited the site to take a look. The concern is about the slope and the symbols indicating usage boundaries, etc.
I spoke with the seller, and he said that you could easily gain or level out about 4.5 meters (15 feet), though not all of it, because there is a neighboring plot below for infiltration purposes and a green belt has to be maintained as well. However, I am not sure what is actually realistic and especially what additional costs we need to plan for, since this is already at the upper limit of our plot budget.
You can see that it slopes quite steeply down – the seller mentioned something about using 1-meter (3 feet) L-shaped retaining walls being allowed, but I’m not sure if that is a requirement or just his advice. What do you think? What options are there? Maybe one or two more terraced levels? It doesn’t all have to be at the highest level on top.
What do these circles mean? According to the legend, they mark usage boundaries. Does that mean nothing can be done there, or that it probably has to be planted?
Even if you have a plan, you still have to buy everything, and it can be rejected again during the building permit / planning permission process, right? How can you be sure before buying that you can do what you’re planning?
Thanks in advance!!!
Bauexperte schrieb:
Only someone with too much time on their hands could write something like this 🙄
Regards, Bauexperte Well, for a proper detached house, that really isn’t much at all. You can already see from the drawing that nothing is left with a 3-meter (10 feet) building setback all around. If the orientation is even unfavorable (from the street view), you can quickly end up with a northwest-facing garden without having any real possibilities to improve it. Also, it has to be a narrow, elongated house extending to the back.
That’s why I’m asking what the price per square meter is, for people to even want to “bother” with such plots. Around here, something like that would be unsellable.
PS: And yes, I know that townhouses or semi-detached houses fit well on 370 sqm (3980 sq ft), but they don’t have a 3-meter (10 feet) setback all around...
H
Henrik081712327 Jun 2016 14:51yes... unfortunately expensive... about 350 euros per square meter (about 33 USD per square foot). But what is really expensive here. The reference value is around 320 euros per square meter (about 31 USD per square foot).
But you just pointed out something... the lower part would have a south-facing garden, and then logically the north side... so north is at the top of the map...
But you just pointed out something... the lower part would have a south-facing garden, and then logically the north side... so north is at the top of the map...
B
Bauexperte27 Jun 2016 15:00Payday schrieb:
well, for a proper detached house that really isn’t much. You can already see from the drawing that nothing really remains with a 3-meter (10 feet) building setback all around. This statement is subjective. I hardly have time anyway; *for me*, it would be more than enough just to maintain the resulting green spaces. We are certainly also talking about land prices here 😉
Payday schrieb:
if the orientation is bad (viewed from the street), you could quickly end up with a northwest-facing garden without being able to do much about it. These excerpts are usually aligned to north; accordingly, the street is to the southwest, as is the garden; the single-family house entrance is located west, in front of the garage. A south-facing garden would again be a reason *for me* not to buy the plot 😀
Payday schrieb:
also, it has to be a narrow house extending toward the back. There are clever architects for that.
Regards, Bauexperte
H
Henrik081712327 Jun 2016 15:27So, the larger plot would have a south-facing garden, and the smaller one a north-facing garden, right? Why would having a south-facing garden be exactly NO reason to buy a plot? Sun allergy?
Payday schrieb:
well, for a truly detached house that really isn’t much. [...] where I live something like that would be impossible to sell.
[... and so on and so forth ...]This is completely normal here — you could even split it again and put two semi-detached houses on it. Then it actually does get tight with a detached garage or carport. If you head to Lübeck, Kiel, or Sylt, there are also building plots where for €350 per square meter (about $370 per square yard) you get five minutes to press your nose flat against the shop window. Do you think those are unsellable too?
With all due respect — who benefits from statements like that!? North Rhine-Westphalia is three times as densely populated as Schleswig-Holstein, and where the price per square meter is €350 (about $370 per square yard), it’s not just cows and countryside around, unlike where you are.
Henrik0817123 schrieb:
so the larger plot would be the south-facing garden, the smaller one north, right? Why would a south-facing garden be a reason NOT to buy a plot? Sun allergy?South-facing gardens are a matter of personal taste. I have one too, but I bought an existing property with tall trees. In a new development, it takes about 20 years for shade-giving trees to grow tall enough.
Best regards,
Dirk Grafe
Similar topics