Hello everyone,
I’m new here and would like to introduce myself/us and share our current situation:
I am 44 and my partner is 46. We currently live with our 1.5-year-old son in my condominium (107 sqm (1150 sq ft); purchased before we met). Since my partner has a one-hour commute each way and we have both had a long-standing interest in owning a house with a garden, we decided to buy a house roughly midway between our workplaces.
Initially, we planned to buy an existing property, but after viewing several, we increasingly felt that for a bit more money, we could get significantly more value with a new build (although I’m starting to doubt our assessment now, but oh well). The high additional costs, some of which were hard to verify, were also off-putting.
So, in September 2019, we put our name on the waiting list for a new development and have now actually secured the plot we liked best from the available options. We signed the purchase contract about a month ago.
Months before, we had already talked to banks and home builders and visited show home villages to get a sense of current houses. The banks gave us the go-ahead for a rough budget, while the builders understandably said they couldn’t meaningfully start discussions until the plot was confirmed.
Now, we’ve presented our plot (which we have also had professionally surveyed). It is important for us to build with a local provider.
Currently, three builders are in the running (plus a larger prefab house builder as a possible fourth, potentially cheaper option). We have received floor plan proposals from all three; one produced a plan for a house in a similar location, while the other two created rough floor plans based on our ideas (which we also received).
Our big dilemma is that we can’t decide which builder to proceed with.
Two of the companies build solid/masonry houses, and one builds timber frame houses. Intuitively, we both feel masonry houses are of better quality (which might now just be a prejudice depending on the builder?), but the same gut feeling trusts the timber frame builder most. We naturally also asked around, and it was thanks to recommendations that we found these three/four options.
Each has its pros and cons for us:
Masonry 1: So far, we have mostly been in contact with a seemingly competent sales rep rather than those who will actually build with and for us (site manager, etc.). They did quite a bit of preliminary work—asking about our wishes and having the architect create a special floor plan—but without fully considering the site’s challenges. Unfortunately, we’ve heard from an acquaintance that they are having problems towards the end (crooked walls, many windows cracked during installation, subcontractors not as local as promised, etc.). Two acquaintances also report that costs significantly exceeded the contract price.
Masonry 2: Didn’t put much effort into planning or our wishes; the floor plan pulled from the drawer at the second meeting might actually be okay, but we spent the entire first meeting discussing a plan that had nothing to do with what we wanted. He simply didn’t listen to our ideas. Advantage: He knows the development very well as he has built several houses there. Everyone we spoke with had very positive things to say about the company. Our contact person is co-owner and also site manager, so we already know who we would be dealing with. Since we’ve only had evening appointments, he seemed exhausted and not particularly attentive—maybe just bad timing.
Timber 1: The whole team gives a sincere, open, and professionally sound impression. The company is seemingly located deep in the woods, where the wood is processed onsite. Their architect personally visited our plot. He also pointed out many structural and legal aspects. The design he presented some weeks later incorporated our wishes as much as possible and included some nice ideas. They also directed us to an ongoing site where they are building a single-family house on a slope, which we visited today to get an impression of the finished product.
Timber 2: Like Masonry 1, we have only talked to a sales rep here. It is a smaller prefab home company, but with a house in a show village where we also met for a discussion. The gentleman took almost three hours for us, and we learned a lot about general costs and other aspects. The company offers both pre-configured homes and custom designs. The main advantage here is likely a somewhat lower price while still building more solidly than much of the prefab competition. Acquaintances who searched for a year for a suitable builder, and were quite picky, chose this company and are happy so far.
Regarding how it feels to work with them, we would currently prefer Timber 1. But we are unsure if we can imagine building with wood. My main concerns are faster depreciation and potentially lower long-term value. Is that a misconception? Are there good and bad timber frame builders? Also, the house with this company wouldn’t be cheaper or ready to move into faster than with the masonry builders. The company always points to the excellent indoor climate in a timber house. But is that really noticeable?
This company works with separate offers: one for planning including submitting the building permit / planning permission, then a separate one for construction. So we could at least have them design the house, but does it make sense to take that plan to another builder afterward?
(In general, I have to say that I am somewhat puzzled about the offer prices—maybe I was a bit naive. Anyway, all three builders want approximately €500,000 to €550,000 net for a turnkey house with about 160 to 180 sqm (1700 to 1937 sq ft) of living space and a double garage (although one does not even include underground garage construction). That’s actually too much for our budget, and we need to see where we can save €50,000. But that’s not the topic of this post.)
Very long text—my questions:
- How do you assess the quality of such custom timber frame houses?
- How important is a good feeling about the builder to you? Would you weigh that more heavily than (possibly irrational) concerns about the building material?
Thank you very much for your thoughts! We really can’t make progress and appreciate any input.
I don’t know if it makes sense for this thread to fill in the data, but just in case, here are the details.
Development Plan / Restrictions
Plot size: 791 sqm (8509 sq ft)
Slope: yes
Site coverage ratio: 0.35
Floor area ratio: 0.6
Building envelope, building line & boundary: see attachment
Number of parking spaces: 2 (double garage planned)
Storeys: 2–2.5 (garden level/partial basement, ground floor, and possibly half attic as a gallery with an open space above the ground floor)
Roof style: gable roof (35–42° specified)
Orientation: open
Maximum heights/limits: ridge height: 6.5 m (21 ft 3 in); full height: 11.5 m (37 ft 9 in)
Other requirements: distance from house to street approx. 4.5 m (15 ft); (site slopes downward from street)
Homeowners’ Requirements
Style, roof shape, building type:
Unfortunately, we are restricted to a gable roof by the development plan; otherwise, I would have chosen a clear Bauhaus-style form.
Basement, storeys:
Garden level with 1/4 basement and 3/4 sleeping areas. Above, ground floor living spaces and possibly half an attic (gallery with open space and one room).
Number of occupants, ages:
3–4 persons: 44 and 46 years old; son 1.5 years and partner’s 12-year-old daughter (who either stays every other weekend or lives there full-time).
Room requirements on ground floor and upper floor:
Because the garage will likely require a basement due to the slope, we planned the basement (storage, possibly workshop) there with access from both the garden side and the house. The garden/basement level itself would contain the utility and laundry room, three bedrooms, and the main bathroom. On the ground floor (level with the street and also accessible from the garage), the living area with kitchen, open living and dining area, pantry/utility room, an office/guest room, and a guest bathroom are planned. An architect from one builder showed us the option of a half attic as a gallery with open ceiling over the living area plus a small room (guest room/office), which I really like.
Office: family use or home office?
Home office will definitely be used partly.
Overnight guests per year:
Hard to say, but a small guest room is planned.
Open or closed architecture:
Rather open in the living area, with an emphasis on views to the unobstructed, sloping greenery (southeast) through high ceilings (no intermediate ceiling there) and large windows.
Open kitchen, kitchen island:
Kitchen can be separated with a sliding door; kitchen island not necessary.
Number of dining seats:
6
Fireplace:
Preferred (or stove), but not mandatory.
Music/speaker wall:
Yes
Balcony, roof terrace:
Balcony on the ground floor facing southeast (preferably partially integrated into the house), south.
Garage, carport:
Garage preferred.
Utility garden, greenhouse:
Partly utility garden, partly space for digging and attractive landscaping, partly play space for our son.
Other wishes/special features/daily routine, including reasons for choices or exclusions:
We envision a KfW55-equivalent house with a (prepared) photovoltaic system.
I want the ground floor designed so that if mobility decreases later, we don’t have to move immediately and can live on one level. Therefore, an extra room on the ground floor is a must, currently for an office/guest room and later convertible to a bedroom. The guest bathroom should also have a shower for the same reason, and somewhere on the ground floor a washing machine connection should be considered.
I tend towards spaciousness and lots of living space with many rooms, but unfortunately, the budget limits that significantly. My partner is more minimalistic and wouldn’t mind if the house wasn’t too large.
I’m new here and would like to introduce myself/us and share our current situation:
I am 44 and my partner is 46. We currently live with our 1.5-year-old son in my condominium (107 sqm (1150 sq ft); purchased before we met). Since my partner has a one-hour commute each way and we have both had a long-standing interest in owning a house with a garden, we decided to buy a house roughly midway between our workplaces.
Initially, we planned to buy an existing property, but after viewing several, we increasingly felt that for a bit more money, we could get significantly more value with a new build (although I’m starting to doubt our assessment now, but oh well). The high additional costs, some of which were hard to verify, were also off-putting.
So, in September 2019, we put our name on the waiting list for a new development and have now actually secured the plot we liked best from the available options. We signed the purchase contract about a month ago.
Months before, we had already talked to banks and home builders and visited show home villages to get a sense of current houses. The banks gave us the go-ahead for a rough budget, while the builders understandably said they couldn’t meaningfully start discussions until the plot was confirmed.
Now, we’ve presented our plot (which we have also had professionally surveyed). It is important for us to build with a local provider.
Currently, three builders are in the running (plus a larger prefab house builder as a possible fourth, potentially cheaper option). We have received floor plan proposals from all three; one produced a plan for a house in a similar location, while the other two created rough floor plans based on our ideas (which we also received).
Our big dilemma is that we can’t decide which builder to proceed with.
Two of the companies build solid/masonry houses, and one builds timber frame houses. Intuitively, we both feel masonry houses are of better quality (which might now just be a prejudice depending on the builder?), but the same gut feeling trusts the timber frame builder most. We naturally also asked around, and it was thanks to recommendations that we found these three/four options.
Each has its pros and cons for us:
Masonry 1: So far, we have mostly been in contact with a seemingly competent sales rep rather than those who will actually build with and for us (site manager, etc.). They did quite a bit of preliminary work—asking about our wishes and having the architect create a special floor plan—but without fully considering the site’s challenges. Unfortunately, we’ve heard from an acquaintance that they are having problems towards the end (crooked walls, many windows cracked during installation, subcontractors not as local as promised, etc.). Two acquaintances also report that costs significantly exceeded the contract price.
Masonry 2: Didn’t put much effort into planning or our wishes; the floor plan pulled from the drawer at the second meeting might actually be okay, but we spent the entire first meeting discussing a plan that had nothing to do with what we wanted. He simply didn’t listen to our ideas. Advantage: He knows the development very well as he has built several houses there. Everyone we spoke with had very positive things to say about the company. Our contact person is co-owner and also site manager, so we already know who we would be dealing with. Since we’ve only had evening appointments, he seemed exhausted and not particularly attentive—maybe just bad timing.
Timber 1: The whole team gives a sincere, open, and professionally sound impression. The company is seemingly located deep in the woods, where the wood is processed onsite. Their architect personally visited our plot. He also pointed out many structural and legal aspects. The design he presented some weeks later incorporated our wishes as much as possible and included some nice ideas. They also directed us to an ongoing site where they are building a single-family house on a slope, which we visited today to get an impression of the finished product.
Timber 2: Like Masonry 1, we have only talked to a sales rep here. It is a smaller prefab home company, but with a house in a show village where we also met for a discussion. The gentleman took almost three hours for us, and we learned a lot about general costs and other aspects. The company offers both pre-configured homes and custom designs. The main advantage here is likely a somewhat lower price while still building more solidly than much of the prefab competition. Acquaintances who searched for a year for a suitable builder, and were quite picky, chose this company and are happy so far.
Regarding how it feels to work with them, we would currently prefer Timber 1. But we are unsure if we can imagine building with wood. My main concerns are faster depreciation and potentially lower long-term value. Is that a misconception? Are there good and bad timber frame builders? Also, the house with this company wouldn’t be cheaper or ready to move into faster than with the masonry builders. The company always points to the excellent indoor climate in a timber house. But is that really noticeable?
This company works with separate offers: one for planning including submitting the building permit / planning permission, then a separate one for construction. So we could at least have them design the house, but does it make sense to take that plan to another builder afterward?
(In general, I have to say that I am somewhat puzzled about the offer prices—maybe I was a bit naive. Anyway, all three builders want approximately €500,000 to €550,000 net for a turnkey house with about 160 to 180 sqm (1700 to 1937 sq ft) of living space and a double garage (although one does not even include underground garage construction). That’s actually too much for our budget, and we need to see where we can save €50,000. But that’s not the topic of this post.)
Very long text—my questions:
- How do you assess the quality of such custom timber frame houses?
- How important is a good feeling about the builder to you? Would you weigh that more heavily than (possibly irrational) concerns about the building material?
Thank you very much for your thoughts! We really can’t make progress and appreciate any input.
I don’t know if it makes sense for this thread to fill in the data, but just in case, here are the details.
Development Plan / Restrictions
Plot size: 791 sqm (8509 sq ft)
Slope: yes
Site coverage ratio: 0.35
Floor area ratio: 0.6
Building envelope, building line & boundary: see attachment
Number of parking spaces: 2 (double garage planned)
Storeys: 2–2.5 (garden level/partial basement, ground floor, and possibly half attic as a gallery with an open space above the ground floor)
Roof style: gable roof (35–42° specified)
Orientation: open
Maximum heights/limits: ridge height: 6.5 m (21 ft 3 in); full height: 11.5 m (37 ft 9 in)
Other requirements: distance from house to street approx. 4.5 m (15 ft); (site slopes downward from street)
Homeowners’ Requirements
Style, roof shape, building type:
Unfortunately, we are restricted to a gable roof by the development plan; otherwise, I would have chosen a clear Bauhaus-style form.
Basement, storeys:
Garden level with 1/4 basement and 3/4 sleeping areas. Above, ground floor living spaces and possibly half an attic (gallery with open space and one room).
Number of occupants, ages:
3–4 persons: 44 and 46 years old; son 1.5 years and partner’s 12-year-old daughter (who either stays every other weekend or lives there full-time).
Room requirements on ground floor and upper floor:
Because the garage will likely require a basement due to the slope, we planned the basement (storage, possibly workshop) there with access from both the garden side and the house. The garden/basement level itself would contain the utility and laundry room, three bedrooms, and the main bathroom. On the ground floor (level with the street and also accessible from the garage), the living area with kitchen, open living and dining area, pantry/utility room, an office/guest room, and a guest bathroom are planned. An architect from one builder showed us the option of a half attic as a gallery with open ceiling over the living area plus a small room (guest room/office), which I really like.
Office: family use or home office?
Home office will definitely be used partly.
Overnight guests per year:
Hard to say, but a small guest room is planned.
Open or closed architecture:
Rather open in the living area, with an emphasis on views to the unobstructed, sloping greenery (southeast) through high ceilings (no intermediate ceiling there) and large windows.
Open kitchen, kitchen island:
Kitchen can be separated with a sliding door; kitchen island not necessary.
Number of dining seats:
6
Fireplace:
Preferred (or stove), but not mandatory.
Music/speaker wall:
Yes
Balcony, roof terrace:
Balcony on the ground floor facing southeast (preferably partially integrated into the house), south.
Garage, carport:
Garage preferred.
Utility garden, greenhouse:
Partly utility garden, partly space for digging and attractive landscaping, partly play space for our son.
Other wishes/special features/daily routine, including reasons for choices or exclusions:
We envision a KfW55-equivalent house with a (prepared) photovoltaic system.
I want the ground floor designed so that if mobility decreases later, we don’t have to move immediately and can live on one level. Therefore, an extra room on the ground floor is a must, currently for an office/guest room and later convertible to a bedroom. The guest bathroom should also have a shower for the same reason, and somewhere on the ground floor a washing machine connection should be considered.
I tend towards spaciousness and lots of living space with many rooms, but unfortunately, the budget limits that significantly. My partner is more minimalistic and wouldn’t mind if the house wasn’t too large.
JayneCobb schrieb:
Timber house builder JayneCobb schrieb:
How do you assess the quality of such a custom timber house? What exactly do you mean by timber house here?
Log house or timber frame construction?
JayneCobb schrieb:
How important is a good feeling about the builder to you? Would you prioritize that more than (irrational?) concerns about the materials? Well, the gut feeling should definitely be positive. But it’s like with men: many can present themselves well, but when you look behind the facade, there’s not much to it 😉
I’ll put it this way: if I have to pay €100,000 more for a good impression, I can also handle building a house with an arrogant CEO.
haydee schrieb:
About the construction company: based on what you write, clearly Timber1.
In my opinion, timber frame is no worse than solid timber. It depends on the workmanship. Yes, there is a lot of enthusiasm reading between the lines.
However, the basement has to be solid anyway, the ground floor then is seamless, so it’s solid and built quickly, right?
JayneCobb schrieb:
although for one there isn’t even a basement under the garage included) That’s not necessary. You mentioned the slope goes down from the street... so the garage could be at the front and above ground level.
By the way, a basement under the garage is new to me as well.
Elokine schrieb:
Homebuilders think it’s a great idea to squeeze themselves into a tiny office as they get older We don’t know the office or the plans. Maybe it’s a nice 15m² (160 sq ft) room after all?
But I understand your point.
A gallery room is quite elaborate. A second staircase is needed too. But a hobby room is a great space for anyone... what was it? Your property is oriented north-south...
Personally, and regardless of whether the office is on that level, I prefer the sleeping area on the ground floor (with the entrance also on the ground floor), and the open living area with kitchen in the basement.
Possibly, the children’s rooms on the ground floor could later be converted into one large room, with kitchen connections planned from the start.
ypg schrieb:
By the way, a basement under the garage is new to me as well.We’ve already encountered that, at least with @SupaCriz and in another case involving a house on a slope. haydee schrieb:
Unfortunately, timber frame companies tend not to include the basement as part of the living area.The solid wood builders don’t either: in most timber houses, the basement is not made of wood, so it is either built on-site or supplied separately — and companies prefer not to outsource value creation to a supplier, so they usually have them build only the foundation and storage basement.https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
J
JayneCobb23 Nov 2020 02:39Wow, many thanks for your numerous contributions, the welcoming comments, and your assessments! 🤨 😀
I’m not even sure if I’ll be able to answer everything now.
First of all, thank you for the praise regarding my introduction; I was already worried I had written too much and no one would read it.
Regarding the companies: Holz 2 builds using timber frame construction, Holz 1 refers to timber framing (which I mistakenly wrote in the original post). But isn’t that basically the same?
I took a photo at the construction site we were allowed to visit, which I’ll attach here.
Massiv 1 says they insulate from the inside; Massiv 2 from the outside.
Is that already a significant difference?
Phew, I had assumed the prices were net amounts; but after checking the offers, I can thankfully say I was mistaken and they are gross prices. Still quite a sum, but realistic when I hear your experiences.
I noticed that Holz 2 initially offered a house for 400,000 euros (including basement and garage); a more detailed discussion about the actual plot is still missing. Still, that’s surprisingly much less than the others (about 100,000 euros less - assuming the final price might be around 420,000 euros).
In our case with Holz 1, the garden/basement level would partially be concrete (where there is lateral earth contact) and could then be continued either as timber or solid construction.
We could see what that looks like at the construction site we visited (also on a slope). I’m attaching a photo here.
So yes, part of the house would automatically not be timber.
Yes, but the land drops almost immediately, and the garage may only start 5 m (16 feet) from the street (I thought that was a regulation everywhere).
So something definitely has to go underneath, unless someone suddenly invented a floating garage. 😉
And if something has to go underneath, Massiv 2 suggested, similar to an existing house, to have a basement with access both from outside and inside. We found that a clever idea to use the space well and free up room inside the house. Surprising how uncommon this is.
Yes, although the roof orientation is variable – North-South or East-West. Currently, I think North-South makes more sense (also because of photovoltaics, though that might be a matter of preference).
My apartment is a gallery flat, and that open spatial feeling is definitely something special.
It would be a nice visual and comfort highlight for a (otherwise perhaps rather unremarkable) house. 🙂
As I mentioned before, I’m a fan of more space/rooms, so that would probably satisfy me in this regard.
According to the architect, it wouldn’t be much more effort; I don’t yet know the additional costs.
Since the roof angle must be at least 35° (per the development plan), there would be plenty of space under the roof anyway.
I’ll try to get around to posting the floor plan draft in the relevant subforum tomorrow, maybe we can discuss it again there, I would appreciate that.
I find it very interesting how many of you recommend placing the bedrooms upstairs and the living space downstairs!
We will think it through again, but currently, we see many advantages if the living area is on the upper floor:
- much shorter distances for carrying groceries, taking out the trash, etc.
- nicer view from the living area into the greenery / the little valley I described than from the basement
- more spacious living feel through an open ceiling / gallery
- ability to come home and “just relax”
- easy accommodation of my hypothetical limited mobility scenario 😉
What are the reasons for moving living downstairs?
Proximity to the garden?
We want to have an outside staircase—probably even from the balcony—down to the garden so you can get downstairs quickly if you want to grill or if the little one wants to play (there will also be a playground just across from our house).
But the shorter distances in everyday life I currently see with living upstairs (including a balcony for dining), sleeping downstairs.
At the very beginning, @haydee wrote: "Living to the garden." Hmm. We’ll still rethink that, as I said.
Thank you for sharing your experience!
Did you do this for cost reasons?
That’s funny that you had the same experience!
Unfortunately not, Holz 1 is located elsewhere.
But I imagine there are several of these dedicated small companies.
As mentioned elsewhere in this thread, the extent of such adaptations is certainly decisive.
For us, it would only mean that the guest bathroom has a shower (which we don’t really see as necessary for a guest bath), the office could be converted into a reasonably suitable bedroom, certain connections would be prepared, etc.
I already had this thought in mind, but after meeting an older couple while looking at plots, who were considering building again because the husband can no longer manage their previous house after a stroke, I found that quite sad for them. And if this can be mitigated with some foresight, why not?
Interesting! I would have thought that young homeowners don’t think about this, while people like us in middle age are already more aware of potential health limitations. 😉
Sure, there are other options, and I don’t have to stubbornly stay in this house until the end of my days, but if some flexibility can be created through forward-looking planning without much extra cost or effort, I think it makes sense. And independently of that, I’d rather build more on one level than have to climb stairs for every little thing.
Sorry, I don’t quite understand what you mean here.
Could you please explain that in other words?
Thanks!
I hope I have addressed all the comments.
And it’s late again. Building a house is tough business—I can already tell. 😉
I’m not even sure if I’ll be able to answer everything now.
First of all, thank you for the praise regarding my introduction; I was already worried I had written too much and no one would read it.
Regarding the companies: Holz 2 builds using timber frame construction, Holz 1 refers to timber framing (which I mistakenly wrote in the original post). But isn’t that basically the same?
I took a photo at the construction site we were allowed to visit, which I’ll attach here.
Massiv 1 says they insulate from the inside; Massiv 2 from the outside.
Is that already a significant difference?
Phew, I had assumed the prices were net amounts; but after checking the offers, I can thankfully say I was mistaken and they are gross prices. Still quite a sum, but realistic when I hear your experiences.
I noticed that Holz 2 initially offered a house for 400,000 euros (including basement and garage); a more detailed discussion about the actual plot is still missing. Still, that’s surprisingly much less than the others (about 100,000 euros less - assuming the final price might be around 420,000 euros).
ypg schrieb:
However, the basement has to be built solid anyway, so the ground floor is basically seamless, meaning the solid parts are done quickly, right?
haydee schrieb:
Timber frame on a solid or concrete basement is no problem. Why not. But unfortunately timber frame companies tend not to include the basement as a living underground floor.
In our case with Holz 1, the garden/basement level would partially be concrete (where there is lateral earth contact) and could then be continued either as timber or solid construction.
We could see what that looks like at the construction site we visited (also on a slope). I’m attaching a photo here.
So yes, part of the house would automatically not be timber.
ypg schrieb:
It doesn’t have to be. You mentioned the slope drops down from the street... the garage could then be located at the front and top.
Basement under the garage is new to me, by the way.
Yes, but the land drops almost immediately, and the garage may only start 5 m (16 feet) from the street (I thought that was a regulation everywhere).
So something definitely has to go underneath, unless someone suddenly invented a floating garage. 😉
And if something has to go underneath, Massiv 2 suggested, similar to an existing house, to have a basement with access both from outside and inside. We found that a clever idea to use the space well and free up room inside the house. Surprising how uncommon this is.
ypg schrieb:
Gallery space is quite elaborate. A second staircase is also needed. But a hobby room like that is a great room for everyone... what was it? Your plot orientation is North-South...
Yes, although the roof orientation is variable – North-South or East-West. Currently, I think North-South makes more sense (also because of photovoltaics, though that might be a matter of preference).
My apartment is a gallery flat, and that open spatial feeling is definitely something special.
It would be a nice visual and comfort highlight for a (otherwise perhaps rather unremarkable) house. 🙂
As I mentioned before, I’m a fan of more space/rooms, so that would probably satisfy me in this regard.
According to the architect, it wouldn’t be much more effort; I don’t yet know the additional costs.
Since the roof angle must be at least 35° (per the development plan), there would be plenty of space under the roof anyway.
I’ll try to get around to posting the floor plan draft in the relevant subforum tomorrow, maybe we can discuss it again there, I would appreciate that.
ypg schrieb:
However, I’m also in favor — so the office floor doesn’t matter — of having the bedroom level on the ground floor (with the entrance also on that level) and the open living kitchen space in the basement.
Possibly the children’s rooms can be combined later on the ground floor into one room and kitchen connections planned now.
I find it very interesting how many of you recommend placing the bedrooms upstairs and the living space downstairs!
We will think it through again, but currently, we see many advantages if the living area is on the upper floor:
- much shorter distances for carrying groceries, taking out the trash, etc.
- nicer view from the living area into the greenery / the little valley I described than from the basement
- more spacious living feel through an open ceiling / gallery
- ability to come home and “just relax”
- easy accommodation of my hypothetical limited mobility scenario 😉
What are the reasons for moving living downstairs?
Proximity to the garden?
We want to have an outside staircase—probably even from the balcony—down to the garden so you can get downstairs quickly if you want to grill or if the little one wants to play (there will also be a playground just across from our house).
But the shorter distances in everyday life I currently see with living upstairs (including a balcony for dining), sleeping downstairs.
At the very beginning, @haydee wrote: "Living to the garden." Hmm. We’ll still rethink that, as I said.
hampshire schrieb:
We chose timber construction and contracted the trades separately.
Thank you for sharing your experience!
Did you do this for cost reasons?
Elokine schrieb:
Your entire description including details about the plot, future house, and company search sounds just like us. Crazy. I wouldn’t be surprised if Holz 1 is based in Großrinderfeld?
That’s funny that you had the same experience!
Unfortunately not, Holz 1 is located elsewhere.
But I imagine there are several of these dedicated small companies.
Elokine schrieb:
I always find such considerations questionable because nobody knows what will happen in 30 years or who might become frail among you... Especially on a sloped plot!
As mentioned elsewhere in this thread, the extent of such adaptations is certainly decisive.
For us, it would only mean that the guest bathroom has a shower (which we don’t really see as necessary for a guest bath), the office could be converted into a reasonably suitable bedroom, certain connections would be prepared, etc.
I already had this thought in mind, but after meeting an older couple while looking at plots, who were considering building again because the husband can no longer manage their previous house after a stroke, I found that quite sad for them. And if this can be mitigated with some foresight, why not?
Elokine schrieb:
Of course it’s good to think ahead. I just don’t understand why so many — often very young — homeowners believe it’s a great solution to squeeze themselves into a tiny office in old age and leave the other one or two floors unused.
There are other options, like stairlifts or, on slopes, ramps. Or moving later in life to a bungalow, a nice city apartment, etc.
Interesting! I would have thought that young homeowners don’t think about this, while people like us in middle age are already more aware of potential health limitations. 😉
Sure, there are other options, and I don’t have to stubbornly stay in this house until the end of my days, but if some flexibility can be created through forward-looking planning without much extra cost or effort, I think it makes sense. And independently of that, I’d rather build more on one level than have to climb stairs for every little thing.
11ant schrieb:
In most timber houses, the basement is not also made of wood, so it’s either built on-site or delivered pre-made – and you generally don’t want to outsource value creation to a supplier, but rather have them build just the foundation-basement storage area.
Sorry, I don’t quite understand what you mean here.
Could you please explain that in other words?
Thanks!
I hope I have addressed all the comments.
And it’s late again. Building a house is tough business—I can already tell. 😉
Without reading too many of the other comments – here’s my opinion/experience, as we will be signing the contract next week after a 9-month search/planning process 😀
- Timber frame construction vs. solid construction: Endless topic... It’s a matter of personal preference... Ultimately, I would be fine building with either. We simply had a better offer from a regional solid construction builder, so we are going with solid construction now. Both have pros and cons, but you can’t go wrong with either. That’s definitely true! So I wouldn’t worry too much about it. Just make sure you compare quality... In the end, the price and your gut feeling might decide, rather than the question of timber frame or solid construction?
- Which general contractor (GC) should I choose?: We compared, compared, and compared again. If you want the right GC that best fits your ideas, I can only recommend comparing as much as possible. It’s a lot of work but it pays off. We shifted from a prefabricated timber frame house to a regional solid builder. The price differences for almost the same houses were up to $60,000. It really pays off to compare! We compared 4 regional solid builders who build most houses in our area. Everything was represented, from completely unsatisfied (which we only realized after the 3rd or 4th meeting) to extremely satisfied (also only after the 3rd meeting)! Don’t be dazzled by the first meetings. Stay persistent, see how much time each GC takes. As you plan and compare more, you will gather and internalize so much information that you will eventually know exactly what matters. You will notice how different the GCs operate and where their focuses lie. You will figure out which GC fits you and which doesn’t.
In my opinion, you can’t even remotely tell if a GC is any good or not after the first draft or the first meeting. Also regarding the price! Very important: definitely keep cost transparency and plan roughly the same floor plan and the same features with all GCs, otherwise you simply cannot compare transparently! The price differences for the EXACT SAME house among our regional GCs were sometimes $40,000!!! You can really save a lot of money if you take your time and compare well.
Important factors that influenced us, or that I believe are important in choosing a GC:
- Experience reports / references in the local area
- Gut feeling
- Are there only salespeople, or do planners/CEOs/managers also attend the meetings → is there technical know-how, or just salespeople? Does the person really know what they’re talking about, or just want to sell?
- Planning approaches/putting your own ideas on paper – how well does the GC “know” you after the 1st or 2nd meeting? Do they know where to “save,” or how to plan the best house for your ideas, or do they just try to charge you a lot and push unnecessary extras?
- Speed of offers/floor plans → How eager are they to get the project – this might also show how reliable the GC is after signing the contract
- Response time to change requests – Is the GC still patient after the 5th email, carefully updating changes and staying transparent?
- Do they take time for your meetings or just handle you quickly?
- PRICE – after all, this is a decisive factor...
- Quality – Do you have to review every single quality detail, or does the GC already include a lot in the standard package? This shows a high quality standard in itself, so you don’t have to worry that the GC will cut corners and build low-quality houses by default.
We actually found someone who meets pretty much all these requirements so far 🙂 So we feel good about signing the construction contract.
- Timber frame construction vs. solid construction: Endless topic... It’s a matter of personal preference... Ultimately, I would be fine building with either. We simply had a better offer from a regional solid construction builder, so we are going with solid construction now. Both have pros and cons, but you can’t go wrong with either. That’s definitely true! So I wouldn’t worry too much about it. Just make sure you compare quality... In the end, the price and your gut feeling might decide, rather than the question of timber frame or solid construction?
- Which general contractor (GC) should I choose?: We compared, compared, and compared again. If you want the right GC that best fits your ideas, I can only recommend comparing as much as possible. It’s a lot of work but it pays off. We shifted from a prefabricated timber frame house to a regional solid builder. The price differences for almost the same houses were up to $60,000. It really pays off to compare! We compared 4 regional solid builders who build most houses in our area. Everything was represented, from completely unsatisfied (which we only realized after the 3rd or 4th meeting) to extremely satisfied (also only after the 3rd meeting)! Don’t be dazzled by the first meetings. Stay persistent, see how much time each GC takes. As you plan and compare more, you will gather and internalize so much information that you will eventually know exactly what matters. You will notice how different the GCs operate and where their focuses lie. You will figure out which GC fits you and which doesn’t.
In my opinion, you can’t even remotely tell if a GC is any good or not after the first draft or the first meeting. Also regarding the price! Very important: definitely keep cost transparency and plan roughly the same floor plan and the same features with all GCs, otherwise you simply cannot compare transparently! The price differences for the EXACT SAME house among our regional GCs were sometimes $40,000!!! You can really save a lot of money if you take your time and compare well.
Important factors that influenced us, or that I believe are important in choosing a GC:
- Experience reports / references in the local area
- Gut feeling
- Are there only salespeople, or do planners/CEOs/managers also attend the meetings → is there technical know-how, or just salespeople? Does the person really know what they’re talking about, or just want to sell?
- Planning approaches/putting your own ideas on paper – how well does the GC “know” you after the 1st or 2nd meeting? Do they know where to “save,” or how to plan the best house for your ideas, or do they just try to charge you a lot and push unnecessary extras?
- Speed of offers/floor plans → How eager are they to get the project – this might also show how reliable the GC is after signing the contract
- Response time to change requests – Is the GC still patient after the 5th email, carefully updating changes and staying transparent?
- Do they take time for your meetings or just handle you quickly?
- PRICE – after all, this is a decisive factor...
- Quality – Do you have to review every single quality detail, or does the GC already include a lot in the standard package? This shows a high quality standard in itself, so you don’t have to worry that the GC will cut corners and build low-quality houses by default.
We actually found someone who meets pretty much all these requirements so far 🙂 So we feel good about signing the construction contract.
Similar topics