ᐅ KfW 40 Plus / Energy-Efficient Building with Brick Facades?
Created on: 3 Mar 2019 19:58
S
simmsalabimmm
Hello,
we would like to build a multi-family house for rental purposes.
Since the property is located on a main road and I want to avoid follow-up costs for the facade, I would prefer to use brick cladding.
However, we are also quite certain that we want to build according to KfW 40 Plus standards.
Is energy-efficient construction compatible with brick cladding?
Are there any experiences regarding how much more expensive brick cladding is compared to plaster in percentage terms?
Thank you!
we would like to build a multi-family house for rental purposes.
Since the property is located on a main road and I want to avoid follow-up costs for the facade, I would prefer to use brick cladding.
However, we are also quite certain that we want to build according to KfW 40 Plus standards.
Is energy-efficient construction compatible with brick cladding?
Are there any experiences regarding how much more expensive brick cladding is compared to plaster in percentage terms?
Thank you!
N
nordanney25 Apr 2019 20:56simmsalabimmm schrieb:
According to our architect, a KFW 40 Plus building for rental is definitely cost-effective.
The additional effort is covered by the subsidies, and of course, I can charge higher rents for the low-energy house. Really? From what I see with my clients—who build hundreds of units at a time—it’s mostly just “standard” buildings. The extra effort isn’t worth it.
And why can you charge higher rents? You have an advantage if you can advertise (on paper) lower heating costs, but that’s about it.
simmsalabimmm schrieb:
Why is the cost/benefit factor for the return nonsense?
With external thermal insulation composite systems (ETICS) I have to repaint.
The property is intended as a long-term investment. Over 30 years....
According to our architect, a KfW 40 Plus standard building for rental definitely makes sense.
The additional effort is covered by subsidies, and of course I can charge higher rents for the low-energy house.But I would ask him what experience this is based on. A tenant usually doesn’t care if it’s a KfW 40+ house, if they even know what that means. If the extra costs were really covered by subsidies, everyone would build that way. Anyone considering a multi-family building as an investment should at least take some time to learn about the subject in detail. Calculate exactly according to the energy-saving ordinance and base all other standards on the achievable rent. If you don’t want to make money but just want to get rid of your cash, of course, you can do whatever you want.
This can definitely be worthwhile, as the 15,000€ repayment grant is available for each housing unit. The necessary technology, such as the photovoltaic system with storage, may only need to be installed once. The additional effort per housing unit mainly comes from the insulation and the increased space requirements.
simmsalabimmm schrieb:
According to our architect, a KfW 40 Plus building for rental is definitely cost-effective. If I were an architect, I would also want to have KfW 40 houses on my agenda.
simmsalabimmm schrieb:
The additional effort is covered by subsidies, and of course I can also charge higher rent for a low-energy house. In the single-family home sector, it is not cost-effective. But I can’t really discuss that honestly, as I lack the knowledge.
If there is a subsidy per residential unit, then yes…
However, it should also be mentioned that as a former client, I rather cursed having to build such a tightly sealed house that starts to smell if you don’t ventilate it. Not only did the construction become more expensive, and ours was only KfW 70 with ventilation. Every expert involved in energy efficiency would rather build a house to the older standards of technology—at least that’s our experience.
nordanney schrieb:
You have an advantage if you can advertise (on paper) low heating costs, but that’s about it. How much less is it? $5? $10? The tenant doesn’t really notice that saving because such apartments are then marketed as “modern comfort apartments with excellent energy ratings” and will cost €4/sqm (about $4/sqft) more. Plus, the interior has to match the technology level. You can forget about a rain shower or a small walk-in closet. Whether you can get that back in rent... what is the target group supposed to be? How many apartments are we talking about? It’s definitely an interesting project!
Thermal insulation is not really the main focus for KFW 40 Plus.
The difference between KFW 40 and 40 Plus is the photovoltaic system including an energy storage battery and energy management.
The battery only makes sense if I use the electricity myself. As a landlord, I would have to sell the electricity to my tenants, which is legally complicated. So, I would have to feed it into the grid instead. In that case, I wouldn't need the battery.
Does anyone know of a practical solution for this?
The difference between KFW 40 and 40 Plus is the photovoltaic system including an energy storage battery and energy management.
The battery only makes sense if I use the electricity myself. As a landlord, I would have to sell the electricity to my tenants, which is legally complicated. So, I would have to feed it into the grid instead. In that case, I wouldn't need the battery.
Does anyone know of a practical solution for this?
S
simmsalabimmm7 Aug 2019 11:17Current status:
On the ground floor, a medical practice will be established, which will definitely use electricity.
Above that, there will be 6 to 9 residential units.
First, the zoning plan / building permit from the city needs to be amended.
Then it will move on to the details.
I will keep you updated.
On the ground floor, a medical practice will be established, which will definitely use electricity.
Above that, there will be 6 to 9 residential units.
First, the zoning plan / building permit from the city needs to be amended.
Then it will move on to the details.
I will keep you updated.
Similar topics