ᐅ Solid (or masonry) house with basement. Is our budget sufficient?
Created on: 21 Jun 2011 10:00
I
isiebeck
Hello everyone,
We are still actively searching for a property of our own. After about x viewings, we realized that within our budget near Munich, only existing houses from the 1960s and 1970s are available. Renovation and modernization would add a lot of extra costs, which doesn’t really appeal to us.
So, plan B is to buy a plot of land and build a single-family house on it. It would be further out but still close to the highway, so commuting to Munich is quick.
Here’s the situation:
Plot of about 540 sqm (5800 sq ft) for 128,000 Euros, it is serviced, and there is already a soil report.
Our total budget including additional costs has an absolute limit of 370,000 Euros.
That leaves around 240,000 Euros for the house, indoor and outdoor areas, garage, and importantly, a good basement.
Our wish list: 5 rooms, about 150–160 sqm (1600–1720 sq ft) of living space, basement, double garage, and a traditional masonry build.
Is this realistic, or are we dreaming?
I am currently collecting quotes from companies because it’s hard to find example houses online with pricing to get a rough idea.
Best regards,
Ingo
We are still actively searching for a property of our own. After about x viewings, we realized that within our budget near Munich, only existing houses from the 1960s and 1970s are available. Renovation and modernization would add a lot of extra costs, which doesn’t really appeal to us.
So, plan B is to buy a plot of land and build a single-family house on it. It would be further out but still close to the highway, so commuting to Munich is quick.
Here’s the situation:
Plot of about 540 sqm (5800 sq ft) for 128,000 Euros, it is serviced, and there is already a soil report.
Our total budget including additional costs has an absolute limit of 370,000 Euros.
That leaves around 240,000 Euros for the house, indoor and outdoor areas, garage, and importantly, a good basement.
Our wish list: 5 rooms, about 150–160 sqm (1600–1720 sq ft) of living space, basement, double garage, and a traditional masonry build.
Is this realistic, or are we dreaming?
I am currently collecting quotes from companies because it’s hard to find example houses online with pricing to get a rough idea.
Best regards,
Ingo
P
perlenmann27 Jun 2011 09:25We have an eave height of 4.2m (13.8 feet), which means the lowest interior height on the upper floor is 1.20m (3.9 feet), and with a 35-degree roof pitch, the attic height is only about 80-90cm (31-35 inches). So it should look better in your case!
T
Tüffteline17 Aug 2013 12:28I have a question regarding this:
We have signed a contract with a solid house manufacturer (shell construction system) for EUR 360,000 excluding additional construction costs (about EUR 35,000).
The property in Frankfurt’s edge-of-field location is already owned.
Includes a usable basement, ground floor, upper floor, attic, plus a walkable loft, underfloor heating, gas condensing boiler, garage, approximately 200 m² (2,150 sq ft) of living space, three fully separate living floors, reinforced concrete staircase, flooring and tile coverings in the apartments, sanitary fittings, basic electrical work.
Is this not too expensive?
Thanks for your answer, construction expert
Best regards, Tüffteline
We have signed a contract with a solid house manufacturer (shell construction system) for EUR 360,000 excluding additional construction costs (about EUR 35,000).
The property in Frankfurt’s edge-of-field location is already owned.
Includes a usable basement, ground floor, upper floor, attic, plus a walkable loft, underfloor heating, gas condensing boiler, garage, approximately 200 m² (2,150 sq ft) of living space, three fully separate living floors, reinforced concrete staircase, flooring and tile coverings in the apartments, sanitary fittings, basic electrical work.
Is this not too expensive?
Thanks for your answer, construction expert
Best regards, Tüffteline
B
Bauexperte17 Aug 2013 16:28Hello,
If I consider only the living area and assume a medium standard, the price for a conventionally built multi-family house is reasonable. I cannot say whether your provider’s price is appropriate since I don’t know their system and specifications.
You do realize that your additional construction costs do not include painting, floor covering work, or landscaping? You have probably already gained experience regarding extra foundation costs.
Best regards, Bauexperte
Tüffteline schrieb:
I have a follow-up question:
We have purchased the following contract with a solid construction house manufacturer (shell construction system) for EUR 360,000 without additional construction costs (about 35,000):
Plot in Frankfurt suburban location already owned,
utility basement, ground floor, upper floor, attic + walkable loft, underfloor heating, gas condensing boiler, garage, about 200 m² (2,150 ft²) living space, three separately habitable floors, reinforced concrete staircase, floor and tile coverings in the apartments, sanitary equipment, basic electrical work;
Isn't this too expensive?
Thanks for your answer, Bauexperte
If I consider only the living area and assume a medium standard, the price for a conventionally built multi-family house is reasonable. I cannot say whether your provider’s price is appropriate since I don’t know their system and specifications.
You do realize that your additional construction costs do not include painting, floor covering work, or landscaping? You have probably already gained experience regarding extra foundation costs.
Best regards, Bauexperte
T
Tüffteline18 Aug 2013 10:13Hello everyone,
these are prefabricated lightweight expanded clay aggregate wall elements, and the flooring work is included.
Even if the price generally seems reasonable, I find it very unfair not to inform the homebuyers about the actual additional construction costs. As a layperson, you cannot know that, for example, the complete earthworks alone amount to an additional five-figure sum. If I had known this beforehand, I probably would have foregone the basement. But this is precisely the reason why sellers hide the true additional construction costs. The homebuyer then has to figure out how to finance this, which in my case is extremely difficult. There should be a law to hold such sellers accountable.
these are prefabricated lightweight expanded clay aggregate wall elements, and the flooring work is included.
Even if the price generally seems reasonable, I find it very unfair not to inform the homebuyers about the actual additional construction costs. As a layperson, you cannot know that, for example, the complete earthworks alone amount to an additional five-figure sum. If I had known this beforehand, I probably would have foregone the basement. But this is precisely the reason why sellers hide the true additional construction costs. The homebuyer then has to figure out how to finance this, which in my case is extremely difficult. There should be a law to hold such sellers accountable.
B
Bauexperte18 Aug 2013 13:50Hello,
although I can fully understand your frustration, the seller is not solely to blame.
There are quite a few sellers who work in such a way that the potential buyer signs the contract — that is true. But it is equally true that every potential buyer has the opportunity to inform themselves thoroughly in advance; often even free of charge, as this and other forums prove. It is always interesting in this context that — when buying a car — every buyer can personally inspect almost every screw. But when it comes to significant amounts of money, most potential homebuyers are terribly naive and are eager to believe the promises of the other party.
Just the wording “on level ground (or comparable)” in your building specifications could have made you more alert could. However, I agree with you that the seller should have informed you about any possible extra foundation costs should. After all, it is of no use to them if your financing falls through, because then they usually have to return their commission and their “work” would have been in vain.
A law — no matter how it might be worded — probably wouldn’t help you either, since house sellers sell houses, not civil engineering services.
Regards, Bauexperte
although I can fully understand your frustration, the seller is not solely to blame.
Tüffteline schrieb:
Even if the price seems generally reasonable, I find it very unfair not to inform the homebuyer about the actual additional construction costs. As a layperson, you cannot know that, for example, all the earthworks alone will add up to an extra five-figure sum. If I had anticipated that beforehand, I probably would have foregone the basement. But that is likely exactly the reason why sellers withhold the true additional building costs. The buyer then has to figure out how to finance it, which in my case is extremely difficult. There should be a law to hold such sellers accountable.
There are quite a few sellers who work in such a way that the potential buyer signs the contract — that is true. But it is equally true that every potential buyer has the opportunity to inform themselves thoroughly in advance; often even free of charge, as this and other forums prove. It is always interesting in this context that — when buying a car — every buyer can personally inspect almost every screw. But when it comes to significant amounts of money, most potential homebuyers are terribly naive and are eager to believe the promises of the other party.
Just the wording “on level ground (or comparable)” in your building specifications could have made you more alert could. However, I agree with you that the seller should have informed you about any possible extra foundation costs should. After all, it is of no use to them if your financing falls through, because then they usually have to return their commission and their “work” would have been in vain.
A law — no matter how it might be worded — probably wouldn’t help you either, since house sellers sell houses, not civil engineering services.
Regards, Bauexperte
Similar topics