ᐅ Very Rough Cost Estimate for a Single-Family Home

Created on: 4 Jan 2019 22:21
P
PotsDame
Hello everyone,

Most of the experienced builders and veterans will probably cringe now... but I still have to ask.

If we consider a simple rectangular single-family house, without any frills, no basement, with standard to slightly comfortable finishes (for example, laminate flooring and external blinds, but standard window sills and basic dimensions, simple tiles, etc.), what price per square meter should one expect?

I am referring to a turnkey delivery, meaning at most you still need to paint and install wooden floors yourself, but the interior finishes, plumbing, electrical work, and tiling are done by professionals.

I have seen figures like 1200, 1300, or even 1500, 1600 per square meter. That can make quite a difference in price.

It’s not yet decided whether the house will be prefabricated or built with solid construction, so if you have different values for either option, please share them 🙂

I understand that none of the prices you give will be final for "my house" specifically. I’m really just looking to get a sense of roughly how much per square meter one might plan for.

I’m deliberately excluding additional building costs here, so I know this is not the final figure and that the amount can change quickly during the selection of materials and fittings—but that’s an individual decision, like whether to choose more expensive doors or not.

But walls, bathrooms, windows, and a roof are obviously necessary for a house like this.

Thanks for your tips and best regards!
Anna
H
HilfeHilfe
4 Jan 2019 23:13
PotsDame schrieb:
Okay, so my question was only worth 4 characters to you.

That's a shame.

Especially since the 1300 euros per m2 (approximately 120 USD per ft²) came from you in a post for a lurker, I believe.

No... I'm the guy for financing ...
Y
ypg
4 Jan 2019 23:16
PotsDame schrieb:
Especially since the 1300 euros per m² came from you in a post I read.

If you follow the discussion closely, you should know there is a north-south gradient, and there are average differences depending on whether the house is 90 or 200 m² (970 or 2,150 sq ft).

Otherwise, just calculate 1800 €/m²*... Building costs in Brandenburg are said to be very affordable.

*Only for the house itself, excluding floor coverings, with standard fittings, average size, built on a concrete slab.
P
PotsDame
4 Jan 2019 23:40
ypg schrieb:
If you’ve been following closely, you should know that there is a north-south gradient and average differences depending on whether the house is 90 or 200 sqm (square meters).

Otherwise, just calculate 1800 €/sqm* ... in Brandenburg, building is supposed to be very affordable.
*only for the house without flooring, standard fittings, average size, on a slab foundation.

Thank you for the constructive reply.

Yes, it is about Brandenburg, and the size should be between 130 and 170 m2 (square meters), depending on what the costs will be.

Milo, thanks for your answer. But I explicitly wrote, only the house, without the plot.

And the living area is exactly what we are still unsure about. Of course, that is something you discuss with the builder, but I would like to have as much information as possible beforehand so we can start planning right away. If you know, for example, that 170 m2 (square meters) of floor area is not financially feasible, then you can immediately look at floor plans with, for example, 150 m2 (square meters).

But I already figured it makes sense to spend two hours discussing everything with a specialist and then wait a few days or weeks until an offer is prepared.

Thanks to all of you
M
Milo3
4 Jan 2019 23:45
My question had a clear purpose: to find out whether it is a generally more expensive area or a more affordable one. But no offense. 170m² (1830 sq ft) does not necessarily mean proportionally more expensive than 130m² (1400 sq ft).
P
PotsDame
4 Jan 2019 23:56
Milo3 schrieb:
My question had a purpose: to find out whether it is a more expensive or rather affordable area. But no offense intended. 170 m² (1,830 sq ft) doesn’t necessarily mean proportionally more expensive than 130 m² (1,400 sq ft).

Thank you, as I said.

It is currently a very, very big topic for us, but more like self-directed research at this stage, so still totally unpolished. You first have to read and think about so much before you spend your well-earned weekends on planning and then, hopefully, ultimately, the hard-earned money on the build.

It was just an attempt to outline the whole thing a bit. Probably not very useful 🙂
11ant5 Jan 2019 00:10
PotsDame schrieb:
So if you know that a 170m2 (1,830 sq ft) floor area is financially out of reach, you can simply look for floor plans around 150m2 (1,615 sq ft).

Really? Are you building larger than you actually need just to impress yourself with the extra square meters in terms of your creditworthiness? Or the opposite: are you camping in the garden because leaving out the space for the bedroom lowers the mortgage payment?

Your furniture requires a certain amount of space, you need a certain amount of room to move around between them, and how efficiently you arrange everything significantly affects the total floor area. More spacious living is not directly proportional to bigger rooms.

And what will you do if your budget only allows for 130m2 (1,400 sq ft), not 170 or 150? Will you give up on the idea of having children and get a small dog instead because it stays small? *smile*
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/