M
Matthew0322 Jan 2020 12:17RaBa2020 schrieb:
Hello
That's right! However, after obtaining the building permit and starting construction, it would still be possible for the buyer to modify the room layout, as far as feasible. Why say "that's right... but"?
No buts. Just divide the property and sell two building plots, done.
RaBa2020 schrieb:
The total plot size is 1,038 m² (11,178 sq ft). So, something should be built that complies with the zoning plan. Since a minimum plot size of 450 m² (4,844 sq ft) is required for a single-family house, the plot will be divided. Two residential houses are planned to be built on it for sale! You want to become a developer, building two single-family houses but not as a semi-detached pair. Whether both houses look the same or are unique designs (of which you have only shown one of the two models here) is something we don’t know yet. I assume you have the creditworthiness for this project; the instigator is a financial advisor; and whether you are done at the end doesn’t matter for their profit. Keep this warning in mind — better than a bullet afterward — that this idea is nonsense: the little house with the bay window is such an individual taste matter that you would only start building something like this with a concrete buyer commitment. In fact, any sensible owner of a 1,038 m² (11,178 sq ft) lot would look for a buyer for the raw plot who already pays for the subdivision; then, with the money for one half and the subdivision fee paid by the buyer, would happily wait for the buyer of the second half — in today’s market hardly longer than the time for a cigarette. Whether those two buyers then build detached or semi-detached houses on it should be of no concern to you. At most — if I really wanted to capture the added value of development — I would put a semi-detached house on it, but even that only with a firm sale agreement. In hindsight, you won’t need to think long about why I suspect a financial advisor behind this foolish idea (and you as their useful fool).
RaBa2020 schrieb:
Fire protection? The garage is not a boundary building! The neighbor’s garage is about 12 to 15 m (39 to 49 ft) away. Here I suspect a misunderstanding. On the plot, I can certainly imagine the entire building set back from the fence but not completely keeping the building setback area free. And if that were so, it would only raise the question of why. You would probably rather place the garage within the building setback zone than make the house so narrow that you have to spice it up with a bay window.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
House 1 would be positioned on the plot like this:
There should still be space to the south, but the garage is in between. The house entrance is unnecessarily located next to the narrow garage driveway; if a step is needed there, it would make the area uncomfortably tight.
The main living areas all face west/north, while the car space, entrance, guest toilet, and utility room enjoy a favorable south-facing orientation. There are unnecessary angled walls inside the house, and the path to the kitchen weaves awkwardly around the dining table.
One more argument in favor of semi-detached houses.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
Pumbaa schrieb:
With a floor area ratio of 0.2, you quickly reach the limit even with a buildable footprint of 560 m² (6,028 sq ft)... Not necessarily. If you take into account an allowable 50% excess when calculating built and paved areas!
Since the adoption resolution of the development plan was passed after 1990
Similar topics