ᐅ Sell the entire property or opt for a partial sale with reinvestment?
Created on: 10 Jun 2018 13:41
K
kaho674
There is a large property in the family located in the center of Dresden. It is a residential area—surrounded by 6-story or even taller new apartment buildings. The land is currently occupied by a very old factory building. The owners do not have the funds to demolish this building and replace it with modern new construction. On the other hand, the ongoing costs and rental income are just about breaking even. If income continues to decline, the property could financially ruin the family.
So the question is what should happen with this "factory land." It is quite certain that it could be completely redeveloped since there are multi-family buildings all around. Adjacent to this land is the family’s own business property (including land), which is not intended to be sold as it is their livelihood.
The immediate idea was, of course, to sell the entire factory land. Its value is estimated at around 1-2 million (minus demolition costs), without going into details here. The money could be taken, divided among the family, and essentially spent without long-term benefit.
However, there are also grandchildren who are struggling to establish themselves in Dresden. The family would like to support them over the long term and believes that a rental property would be ideal. Coincidentally, the grandchildren are trained in property management and could help oversee the project.
So the idea came up to sell only part of the land to gain liquidity, demolish the old building, and construct a multi-family house—ideally in collaboration with an investor who would buy and develop the other half. Of course, everything would need to be carefully calculated to see if this is feasible and if the land will generate enough value.
Is something like this possible, or is it just a scam? What would you do?
So the question is what should happen with this "factory land." It is quite certain that it could be completely redeveloped since there are multi-family buildings all around. Adjacent to this land is the family’s own business property (including land), which is not intended to be sold as it is their livelihood.
The immediate idea was, of course, to sell the entire factory land. Its value is estimated at around 1-2 million (minus demolition costs), without going into details here. The money could be taken, divided among the family, and essentially spent without long-term benefit.
However, there are also grandchildren who are struggling to establish themselves in Dresden. The family would like to support them over the long term and believes that a rental property would be ideal. Coincidentally, the grandchildren are trained in property management and could help oversee the project.
So the idea came up to sell only part of the land to gain liquidity, demolish the old building, and construct a multi-family house—ideally in collaboration with an investor who would buy and develop the other half. Of course, everything would need to be carefully calculated to see if this is feasible and if the land will generate enough value.
Is something like this possible, or is it just a scam? What would you do?
The walls actually taper significantly towards the top. The direction you want to take depends heavily on the initial situation. For me, this means the first question is: Is the existing structure usable or not?
Don’t forget: just demolishing it costs around 600,000. So you take a closer look at the walls.
Don’t forget: just demolishing it costs around 600,000. So you take a closer look at the walls.
kaho674 schrieb:
The direction you want to take strongly depends on the starting situation. For me, that first means the question: Is the existing building usable or not? Yes and no. Even a usable existing building should only be prepared for a specifically and currently marketable use; "more vacancy" is not needed anywhere.
kaho674 schrieb:
Don’t forget: demolition alone costs 600 thousand. But that doesn’t necessarily mean you can count the saved demolition costs as an asset in favor of the old building. It might be the cheapest option to speculate on a drop in demolition costs and only look for interim use.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
11ant schrieb:
Yes and no. Even a usable property should only be prepared for a clearly marketable use in the near future; having “more vacant space” is not needed anywhere. The current market situation isn’t bad. Apartments are rather scarce in the area. The big question is whether this will remain the case for the next 20 years. But if we knew that, either everyone or no one would do anything anymore.
11ant schrieb:
It could be the cheapest option to speculate on a decrease in demolition costs and only look for temporary use. Ha. We’ve actually had the interim solution for 30 years now.
It also matters that the building has become an eyesore and people are ashamed of it. So, it’s not “just” about money.
kaho674 schrieb:
The current market situation isn’t bad. Apartments are rather scarce in the area. There are huge differences between seemingly similar things, for example, between demand for an apartment from renters and demand for the same apartment from an owner-occupier or a landlord (and among the latter, between investors and those genuinely interested in rental management). Also, no one simply asks for "one apartment" of a certain size; someone who prefers a concrete floor will pass on the next property if they see marble. Inexperienced new investors also regularly overestimate the demand for lofts in every large city.
And “market” is very localized in this context: if the same penthouses three streets away have a better river view, it doesn’t help at all if the targeted property is in demand at the city-wide level.
kaho674 schrieb:
It’s also important that the building has become an eyesore That is actually more of an advantage.
Let’s see when I get around to looking into the location details you shared. The more specific and property-related the discussion is, the less you miss the mark. However, it really only makes sense once your relatives give you the “speaker’s mandate.” As long as your discussion here with the community and their discussion with “Mr. X” are only running parallel, it won’t lead anywhere.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
11ant schrieb:
That’s actually more of a positive pointHuh? 11ant schrieb:
But it only really makes sense if your relatives want to give you the "speaker mandate."Sorry, I wouldn’t bet on that. This isn’t my property. I’m here to ask questions. Sometimes someone knows the answer, sometimes they don’t.N
nordanney1 Nov 2018 17:27kaho674 schrieb:
Sometimes someone has advice, sometimes they don’t. But you can only get good advice if all the information is available.
I would also like to contribute, as projects like these are my daily business, but unfortunately, that’s not possible without specific information.
Similar topics