Hello everyone,
We currently have several options regarding real estate. We are in the process of finding the most suitable one for us, but it’s proving quite difficult. That’s why I wanted to present all the options here for discussion and get some external opinions.
First, our current situation:
We are a family of four:
Wife, 30 years old; myself, 34 years old; two children (2 and 4 years old).
About 4.5 years ago, we bought a fixer-upper two-family house on roughly 1600 sqm (17200 sq ft) of land at a good price.
We have renovated it a lot ourselves and then moved into one unit. The other unit is rented out inexpensively to family.
Each unit is only 95 sqm (1020 sq ft). This is a bit tight for us as a family of four, especially since my wife is self-employed and has a home office. Currently, the two boys share a room. This works at their age but won’t be feasible long term.
The house got new windows, but the masonry isn’t very thick. Therefore, we have to ventilate very carefully and monitor humidity to avoid mold—so a lot of airing out!
Current debt: 240,000 (Currency not specified).
Now, we are considering how to proceed.
Currently, we see the following options:
Option 1:
Stay in the house. Remove the old oil tank from the basement and convert that space into a home office for my wife. That way, each child would have their own room.
Advantages:
We would likely have everything paid off within 7 years and be debt-free.
We would still have the really large garden.
After paying off the mortgage, we would continue to receive rent from the second unit.
Disadvantages:
The home office would be in the basement, which would need additional heating and probably a dehumidifier, since the basement is old and not climatically ideal. Nearly no natural light.
We would continue living in an old house with humidity issues in our unit. Either expensive insulation or installing a decentralized ventilation system would be necessary. A ventilation system is not ideal either; due to the layout, we would probably need six individual units, which would require breaking channels into the walls. Noise from the busy street in front of the house would likely increase.
We partly use wood heating to save on gas costs. This creates a lot of work and mess.
Insulation problems: The balcony would have to be removed. The driveway next to the house is already very narrow and would become almost too tight. The basement stairwell behind the house would need to be relocated, as it would otherwise be very cramped. All of this would also be expensive.
Option 2:
Build a new house at the back of the garden for ourselves and rent out the current house completely.
Advantages:
We would live alone in our own house and practically have the garden to ourselves.
We could build the house exactly as we want, from the energy standard to the comfort of the ventilation system and layout.
We would receive rent from two apartments plus garages (potentially a good retirement plan).
Disadvantages:
The garden would be somewhat smaller.
We would have to insulate and/or equip the current house with a ventilation system because we cannot expect tenants to ventilate carefully.
We would still own the old house, which will almost certainly require renovation costs in the next 30 years.
We would likely only be debt-free in about 15 years.
I would have to manage both the house and the tenants.
Insulation problems: The balcony would have to be removed. The driveway next to the house is already very narrow and would become almost too tight. The basement stairwell behind the house would need to be relocated because access would otherwise be too cramped. This would all be expensive again.
Option 3:
Build at the back of the garden and sell the front house with approximately 600 sqm (6460 sq ft) of land.
Advantages:
We would live alone in our own house and have the entire garden for ourselves.
We could build the house exactly as we want, from the energy standard to the comfort of the ventilation system and layout.
We would likely get enough from selling the current house to cover the current debt plus the new build. This means we would be debt-free immediately.
We would no longer have to deal with the “old place” and have no stress with tenants.
Disadvantages:
The garden would be a bit smaller (though about 900 sqm (9700 sq ft) of land would still remain).
We would no longer have passive income from renting.
Our current tenants (my wife’s uncle and his family) probably wouldn’t like this since they currently live very cheaply here. They could only stay here at that rate for five more years after the sale (they also made upgrades like a new kitchen and wood stove). They wouldn’t find another apartment of this size that cheap.
Additional information:
I roughly calculated that if we didn’t sell the house, it would take about 34 years to recover the purchase price we could get now through rental income. During that time, of course, renovation costs would also come up. We would also have to pay interest on the current mortgage and possibly the new one. So I think only after about 40 years renting would be more economical than selling now.
I look forward to your opinions and suggestions.
Regards,
Partyheld
We currently have several options regarding real estate. We are in the process of finding the most suitable one for us, but it’s proving quite difficult. That’s why I wanted to present all the options here for discussion and get some external opinions.
First, our current situation:
We are a family of four:
Wife, 30 years old; myself, 34 years old; two children (2 and 4 years old).
About 4.5 years ago, we bought a fixer-upper two-family house on roughly 1600 sqm (17200 sq ft) of land at a good price.
We have renovated it a lot ourselves and then moved into one unit. The other unit is rented out inexpensively to family.
Each unit is only 95 sqm (1020 sq ft). This is a bit tight for us as a family of four, especially since my wife is self-employed and has a home office. Currently, the two boys share a room. This works at their age but won’t be feasible long term.
The house got new windows, but the masonry isn’t very thick. Therefore, we have to ventilate very carefully and monitor humidity to avoid mold—so a lot of airing out!
Current debt: 240,000 (Currency not specified).
Now, we are considering how to proceed.
Currently, we see the following options:
Option 1:
Stay in the house. Remove the old oil tank from the basement and convert that space into a home office for my wife. That way, each child would have their own room.
Advantages:
We would likely have everything paid off within 7 years and be debt-free.
We would still have the really large garden.
After paying off the mortgage, we would continue to receive rent from the second unit.
Disadvantages:
The home office would be in the basement, which would need additional heating and probably a dehumidifier, since the basement is old and not climatically ideal. Nearly no natural light.
We would continue living in an old house with humidity issues in our unit. Either expensive insulation or installing a decentralized ventilation system would be necessary. A ventilation system is not ideal either; due to the layout, we would probably need six individual units, which would require breaking channels into the walls. Noise from the busy street in front of the house would likely increase.
We partly use wood heating to save on gas costs. This creates a lot of work and mess.
Insulation problems: The balcony would have to be removed. The driveway next to the house is already very narrow and would become almost too tight. The basement stairwell behind the house would need to be relocated, as it would otherwise be very cramped. All of this would also be expensive.
Option 2:
Build a new house at the back of the garden for ourselves and rent out the current house completely.
Advantages:
We would live alone in our own house and practically have the garden to ourselves.
We could build the house exactly as we want, from the energy standard to the comfort of the ventilation system and layout.
We would receive rent from two apartments plus garages (potentially a good retirement plan).
Disadvantages:
The garden would be somewhat smaller.
We would have to insulate and/or equip the current house with a ventilation system because we cannot expect tenants to ventilate carefully.
We would still own the old house, which will almost certainly require renovation costs in the next 30 years.
We would likely only be debt-free in about 15 years.
I would have to manage both the house and the tenants.
Insulation problems: The balcony would have to be removed. The driveway next to the house is already very narrow and would become almost too tight. The basement stairwell behind the house would need to be relocated because access would otherwise be too cramped. This would all be expensive again.
Option 3:
Build at the back of the garden and sell the front house with approximately 600 sqm (6460 sq ft) of land.
Advantages:
We would live alone in our own house and have the entire garden for ourselves.
We could build the house exactly as we want, from the energy standard to the comfort of the ventilation system and layout.
We would likely get enough from selling the current house to cover the current debt plus the new build. This means we would be debt-free immediately.
We would no longer have to deal with the “old place” and have no stress with tenants.
Disadvantages:
The garden would be a bit smaller (though about 900 sqm (9700 sq ft) of land would still remain).
We would no longer have passive income from renting.
Our current tenants (my wife’s uncle and his family) probably wouldn’t like this since they currently live very cheaply here. They could only stay here at that rate for five more years after the sale (they also made upgrades like a new kitchen and wood stove). They wouldn’t find another apartment of this size that cheap.
Additional information:
I roughly calculated that if we didn’t sell the house, it would take about 34 years to recover the purchase price we could get now through rental income. During that time, of course, renovation costs would also come up. We would also have to pay interest on the current mortgage and possibly the new one. So I think only after about 40 years renting would be more economical than selling now.
I look forward to your opinions and suggestions.
Regards,
Partyheld
Partyheld schrieb:
There are two plots of land. [...] We would like to adjust the property boundaries slightly so that the currently empty plot becomes 900 sqm (9700 sq ft) and the plot with the existing house becomes 600 sqm (6500 sq ft). These should then be sold accordingly. The plots could also be combined without the differently divided separation mentioned below.
Partyheld schrieb:
For the plot with the existing house, there are no specific values, only a building envelope. That suggests a subdivision desired by the regulator, likely indicating that the depth of the plot is not suitable for a three- or four-family house, possibly with the existing building as the core of the development.
Partyheld schrieb:
For the rear plot (still undeveloped), there is the zoning plan as described earlier. Does that mean there is only a densification zoning plan for gardens and rear plots, but the street-facing plot itself is within a §34 area (planning permission based on surrounding development)?
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
P
Partyheld11 Feb 2020 14:58Here is the development plan.
The two properties are outlined in purple.
At the bottom, you can see the existing building in gray.
The area marked in red does not exist; that would only be possible in theory.
For the upper building zone (marked in blue), the development plan provides specifications. For the lower building zone (also marked in blue), there are no requirements.
In "Development Plan 2," I have indicated the boundary line between the two properties and how I would like to shift it (approximately).
This would make the upper property with the new building slightly larger.
The lower one with the existing two-family house I would want to sell then. (Based on the current plan)
The two properties are outlined in purple.
At the bottom, you can see the existing building in gray.
The area marked in red does not exist; that would only be possible in theory.
For the upper building zone (marked in blue), the development plan provides specifications. For the lower building zone (also marked in blue), there are no requirements.
In "Development Plan 2," I have indicated the boundary line between the two properties and how I would like to shift it (approximately).
This would make the upper property with the new building slightly larger.
The lower one with the existing two-family house I would want to sell then. (Based on the current plan)
Partyheld schrieb:
Here is the development plan.
The two properties are outlined in purple. You could have just said right away that we already know you and your story:
Specki schrieb:
Brief background and context:
We own parcel number 2414 and the adjacent property at the back, which is outlined in purple and additionally marked with a circle for better identification.
The property area is approximately 750 sqm (8,073 sq ft). [...] I have no problem with people forgetting their passwords and simply registering again – that doesn’t bother me. But not linking to the beginning of a story and making us piece everything together here – often repeating details unintentionally – and acting as if it’s a completely new topic from a completely new member, that really tests my patience. I’m out now :-(
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
Nice plot of land. I would subdivide it (but why not create a nicely shaped rectangular lot?) and build a nice single-family house on the rear part at the end of the cul-de-sac. Sell the two-family house at the front. If the whole process is even cost-neutral, you can build somewhat more spacious / luxurious than 140m² (1,506 sq ft) on an 800–900m² (8,611–9,688 sq ft) lot and take out a loan for the missing 100,000–200,000 euros.
For the resale value in the greater Munich area, more than 200m² (2,153 sq ft) of living space on an 800m² (8,611 sq ft) lot is probably more attractive to potential buyers.
For the resale value in the greater Munich area, more than 200m² (2,153 sq ft) of living space on an 800m² (8,611 sq ft) lot is probably more attractive to potential buyers.
P
Partyheld11 Feb 2020 16:09If I were to divide it into suitable rectangular sections, the existing double garage/workshop would be completely cut through.
I would like to keep it with the new plot, which is why I arranged the division this way.
I would like to keep it with the new plot, which is why I arranged the division this way.
What matters more to you? Being debt-free or living comfortably?
Being debt-free if you keep the two-family house is nice—you can reduce working hours, take more holidays, and so on.
Or you build new because you really want to and enjoy your single-family home with the big garden. Even if you borrow another 200,000 (about 200,000) that’s not a huge deal... at least for me. The question is: how is it for YOU?
Being debt-free if you keep the two-family house is nice—you can reduce working hours, take more holidays, and so on.
Or you build new because you really want to and enjoy your single-family home with the big garden. Even if you borrow another 200,000 (about 200,000) that’s not a huge deal... at least for me. The question is: how is it for YOU?
Similar topics