Hello,
In our area, it is very difficult to find an affordable plot of land. Recently, we noticed one that is somewhat special but quite large.
So far, it is a large plot of about 1400 sq m (15,000 sq ft).
It is planned to be divided, with two detached single-family houses to be built on it.
Because of the specific location, an access road needs to be constructed (see simulation—instead of the row houses, there will be two separate houses).
The plot must be developed with a particular general contractor (GC).
They have apparently already obtained a cost estimate for this, including the demolition of the existing building.
The access will belong to both parties, and the costs will be split between them.
The costs have been listed by the GC in an initial sample calculation as follows:
External development costs €30,000
Demolition work €22,500
Special foundation / foundation elevation €10,000
Removal of excavated earth and backfilling €10,000
Do you think these estimates could be roughly accurate for a project like this? The costs mentioned above also include the “normal” additional construction expenses for the single-family houses. No distinction was made between the driveway and the house.
Are these projected costs realistic?
Do you see any other risks with this approach? For example, what if the other party stops paying their half? Then we wouldn’t be able to proceed...
Definitely an unusual project, and I look forward to your assessments!
Best regards
In our area, it is very difficult to find an affordable plot of land. Recently, we noticed one that is somewhat special but quite large.
So far, it is a large plot of about 1400 sq m (15,000 sq ft).
It is planned to be divided, with two detached single-family houses to be built on it.
Because of the specific location, an access road needs to be constructed (see simulation—instead of the row houses, there will be two separate houses).
The plot must be developed with a particular general contractor (GC).
They have apparently already obtained a cost estimate for this, including the demolition of the existing building.
The access will belong to both parties, and the costs will be split between them.
The costs have been listed by the GC in an initial sample calculation as follows:
External development costs €30,000
Demolition work €22,500
Special foundation / foundation elevation €10,000
Removal of excavated earth and backfilling €10,000
Do you think these estimates could be roughly accurate for a project like this? The costs mentioned above also include the “normal” additional construction expenses for the single-family houses. No distinction was made between the driveway and the house.
Are these projected costs realistic?
Do you see any other risks with this approach? For example, what if the other party stops paying their half? Then we wouldn’t be able to proceed...
Definitely an unusual project, and I look forward to your assessments!
Best regards
Alright, a new attempt with the additional information, but first back to the first picture: it is clearly visible that from the parking deck to the front of the house, about two and a half meters (8 feet) of height must be overcome via stairs. Regarding the slope of the terrain, my interpretation that the path shown at the bottom is at elevation 230 is probably incorrect. However, the image does not show a row of houses only at 231; rather, the main contractor (I stick to the assumption that he originally intended to act as the developer) apparently wanted to redesign plots 211 and 228 to 231 altogether – including the attractive villa – but then probably only received approval for 231. The image can never show a row of houses parallel to the street only on 231!
So I maintain the assessment that what is happening here is an attempt to reuse leftovers from a failed project. Under no circumstances should you imagine that the first picture shows the entire width of 231, and by omitting the middle row house, something like what is depicted could actually be implemented. Based on your total area information, the plot would be about 24 x 57 m (79 x 187 feet). Find out how the plot is supposed to be subdivided and what the relevant building regulations/planning permissions are. I suspect Section 34 (building authorization based on surrounding development), but with actual building boundaries and height restrictions oriented toward the neighboring buildings. I consider it possible to have an access drive and parking deck similar to the first picture, and then real subdivision behind it with semi-detached houses built (?).
Keep this in mind: when a professional passes something on to less experienced hopefuls at colleague-net prices for further development, there is always a reason (which has nothing to do with friendship, altruism, or anything similar). Just because they are more interested in other projects, it could also be offered to competitors – the circle is networking well enough. Be extremely cautious when you hear "your chance" regarding something that neither Mr. H. nor Mr. J. nor Mr. Pitter from Mr. Günni want. When a wolf steps back and the others do not want the prey, something is definitely wrong. And the fact that simply no third player can be found to take over and sell such a small row of houses is definitely not due to the current market situation!
There is a saying about similar deals: greed eats the brain – on the real estate market, a variant applies: desperation eats caution.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
So I maintain the assessment that what is happening here is an attempt to reuse leftovers from a failed project. Under no circumstances should you imagine that the first picture shows the entire width of 231, and by omitting the middle row house, something like what is depicted could actually be implemented. Based on your total area information, the plot would be about 24 x 57 m (79 x 187 feet). Find out how the plot is supposed to be subdivided and what the relevant building regulations/planning permissions are. I suspect Section 34 (building authorization based on surrounding development), but with actual building boundaries and height restrictions oriented toward the neighboring buildings. I consider it possible to have an access drive and parking deck similar to the first picture, and then real subdivision behind it with semi-detached houses built (?).
Keep this in mind: when a professional passes something on to less experienced hopefuls at colleague-net prices for further development, there is always a reason (which has nothing to do with friendship, altruism, or anything similar). Just because they are more interested in other projects, it could also be offered to competitors – the circle is networking well enough. Be extremely cautious when you hear "your chance" regarding something that neither Mr. H. nor Mr. J. nor Mr. Pitter from Mr. Günni want. When a wolf steps back and the others do not want the prey, something is definitely wrong. And the fact that simply no third player can be found to take over and sell such a small row of houses is definitely not due to the current market situation!
There is a saying about similar deals: greed eats the brain – on the real estate market, a variant applies: desperation eats caution.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
poh, so there are two detached single-family houses on the property – this means the front house practically has no garden left due to the parking space, steep driveway, and the passage to the house at the back. The rear house definitely has to be built with a basement into the slope (stone? = very expensive), but it could then have a rooftop terrace if that is allowed...
M
Mickykitty17 Jul 2020 15:39Thank you all for your replies.
We visited the site earlier but couldn’t access the property. From the street, nothing was visible due to the wall and overgrown vegetation. We even walked across the field above the property trying to get a better view, but everything was overgrown. We asked a neighbor, but she had no idea how steep the land rises at the back.
According to Tim, the plot is 26 meters (85 feet) wide online. I don’t quite understand why a row of three houses or two single-family homes wouldn’t fit. Narrow plots like this are very common here. The builder has a narrow single-family house model that is 6.5 meters (21 feet) wide. That’s what’s planned to be built. So each house would need around 12.5 meters (41 feet) of width. Double that and you get 25 meters (82 feet). That fits. Whether it makes sense and if a garden at the back can actually be used is another matter, since apparently the slope starts again from the middle of the property.
Anyway, we were there. We saw the many trees (tree removal wasn’t included in the ancillary building costs) and the slope at the back, which wasn’t disclosed to us. Even though we couldn’t see the back slope ourselves, both the villa on the left and the house on the right had a very steep incline. I doubt that the ancillary building costs will be as low as 100,000 euros for this property. And that is beyond our budget. I’m not going to rush into a difficult situation just because we want to own property. That’s why I’m asking here, since I naturally see things more subjectively than you do. I’m always open to comments and warnings. So we will definitely back away from this project.
We visited the site earlier but couldn’t access the property. From the street, nothing was visible due to the wall and overgrown vegetation. We even walked across the field above the property trying to get a better view, but everything was overgrown. We asked a neighbor, but she had no idea how steep the land rises at the back.
According to Tim, the plot is 26 meters (85 feet) wide online. I don’t quite understand why a row of three houses or two single-family homes wouldn’t fit. Narrow plots like this are very common here. The builder has a narrow single-family house model that is 6.5 meters (21 feet) wide. That’s what’s planned to be built. So each house would need around 12.5 meters (41 feet) of width. Double that and you get 25 meters (82 feet). That fits. Whether it makes sense and if a garden at the back can actually be used is another matter, since apparently the slope starts again from the middle of the property.
Anyway, we were there. We saw the many trees (tree removal wasn’t included in the ancillary building costs) and the slope at the back, which wasn’t disclosed to us. Even though we couldn’t see the back slope ourselves, both the villa on the left and the house on the right had a very steep incline. I doubt that the ancillary building costs will be as low as 100,000 euros for this property. And that is beyond our budget. I’m not going to rush into a difficult situation just because we want to own property. That’s why I’m asking here, since I naturally see things more subjectively than you do. I’m always open to comments and warnings. So we will definitely back away from this project.
Thanks for the pictures.
Apart from boris, there is also the Geoportal.nrw, for example. There you can get very detailed elevation maps.
Mickykitty schrieb:What exactly will be demolished?
Demolition work 22,500 €
Apart from boris, there is also the Geoportal.nrw, for example. There you can get very detailed elevation maps.
Mickykitty schrieb:
The general contractor offers a narrow single-family house model with a width of 6.5m (21 feet). That is planned for construction. So each property needs to be 12.5m (41 feet) wide. Multiply by 2, and we have 25m (82 feet). That fits.Simplistic calculation based on 3m (10 feet); here, however, it will likely take more than half an hour; and I would expect two semi-detached houses instead.Mickykitty schrieb:
I doubt it is possible to cover ancillary building costs of 100,000€ here.Yes, that definitely wouldn’t be cheap here.Mickykitty schrieb:
And therefore we will definitely step away from this project.That sounds sensible. At least one mistake avoided – though it remains an unsatisfied wish. Describe which "prince" is being sought or how its still less painful downgrade to a "frog" would have to look.https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
Similar topics