ᐅ Realistic Cost Estimate: Single-Family Home with Challenging Site Access
Created on: 20 Jan 2023 10:50
S
schmeissrein
Hello everyone,
I have been following this forum for a while and first of all, a big thank you to everyone who shares their advice here and sometimes also speaks hard truths. I didn’t originally want to create a new thread but intended to form an opinion based on other discussions. However, you convinced me that this building project is too individual for that. So here is our plan:
- Building a new single-family house in the far north of Germany (Schleswig-Flensburg region).
- Plot size is over 1000sqm (10,764 sq ft).
- Total square meters are not so important as long as the layout works.
- Basement is not planned.
What we would like:
- Open-plan kitchen-living area of at least 36m² (388 sq ft).
- Guest room (at least 10m² / 108 sq ft) and small guest bathroom with shower on the ground floor, so that in old age, with disability, or a broken leg, the ground floor can be used independently and possibly serve as a bedroom.
- Utility room / storage room / pantry with heat pump of at least 8m² (86 sq ft) (KfW 40 standard would be great, of course).
- Upper floor with three rooms (1 office, 1 master bedroom, 1 child’s room) each at least 14m² (151 sq ft) and one bathroom. Our dream would be a “walk-in” (what a silly word – aren’t all showers walk-in?) shower to avoid having to clean those limescale-rusty, annoying shower enclosures.
- We could contribute labor for garden landscaping and painting/wallpapering; otherwise, we would prefer a turnkey build.
As for the house style, regionally typical Frisian houses or captain’s houses (with all the “cute” features like small gables, etc.) are in consideration, or also not completely unimaginative “normal” single-family houses. We are not afraid of Bauhaus-style concrete marvels either, but those tend to be more expensive. In terms of fittings, no “gold-plated faucets” and no smart home – but decent and presentable.
The big BUT: the plot is not connected to utilities, and the distance to the street is about 65m (213 ft), of which 50m (164 ft) is a paved driveway and paved parking area that would have to be dug up (across another property). The connection costs and incidental construction costs worry us quite a bit. Does anyone have experience with such a “mammoth connection” for a relatively small building project? What realistic costs should we expect for both?
We would greatly appreciate any thoughts on this project, thank you very much in advance!
I have been following this forum for a while and first of all, a big thank you to everyone who shares their advice here and sometimes also speaks hard truths. I didn’t originally want to create a new thread but intended to form an opinion based on other discussions. However, you convinced me that this building project is too individual for that. So here is our plan:
- Building a new single-family house in the far north of Germany (Schleswig-Flensburg region).
- Plot size is over 1000sqm (10,764 sq ft).
- Total square meters are not so important as long as the layout works.
- Basement is not planned.
What we would like:
- Open-plan kitchen-living area of at least 36m² (388 sq ft).
- Guest room (at least 10m² / 108 sq ft) and small guest bathroom with shower on the ground floor, so that in old age, with disability, or a broken leg, the ground floor can be used independently and possibly serve as a bedroom.
- Utility room / storage room / pantry with heat pump of at least 8m² (86 sq ft) (KfW 40 standard would be great, of course).
- Upper floor with three rooms (1 office, 1 master bedroom, 1 child’s room) each at least 14m² (151 sq ft) and one bathroom. Our dream would be a “walk-in” (what a silly word – aren’t all showers walk-in?) shower to avoid having to clean those limescale-rusty, annoying shower enclosures.
- We could contribute labor for garden landscaping and painting/wallpapering; otherwise, we would prefer a turnkey build.
As for the house style, regionally typical Frisian houses or captain’s houses (with all the “cute” features like small gables, etc.) are in consideration, or also not completely unimaginative “normal” single-family houses. We are not afraid of Bauhaus-style concrete marvels either, but those tend to be more expensive. In terms of fittings, no “gold-plated faucets” and no smart home – but decent and presentable.
The big BUT: the plot is not connected to utilities, and the distance to the street is about 65m (213 ft), of which 50m (164 ft) is a paved driveway and paved parking area that would have to be dug up (across another property). The connection costs and incidental construction costs worry us quite a bit. Does anyone have experience with such a “mammoth connection” for a relatively small building project? What realistic costs should we expect for both?
We would greatly appreciate any thoughts on this project, thank you very much in advance!
schmeissrein25 Apr 2023 07:17Hello everyone,
today I need to vent a little. We’ve looked at several houses as references. When I see 160 m² (1,722 sq ft) for three people, it seems extremely large to me. Then I visit actual houses and it feels like no room is really spacious, some even borderline small. How can that be? What should or shouldn’t be done during planning to make the space feel more open and airy? I don’t mean just enlarging the whole house, because somehow I don’t get why three to four people couldn’t manage with 160 m² (148 m² (1,593 sq ft) or so according to living space regulations) 🙁
today I need to vent a little. We’ve looked at several houses as references. When I see 160 m² (1,722 sq ft) for three people, it seems extremely large to me. Then I visit actual houses and it feels like no room is really spacious, some even borderline small. How can that be? What should or shouldn’t be done during planning to make the space feel more open and airy? I don’t mean just enlarging the whole house, because somehow I don’t get why three to four people couldn’t manage with 160 m² (148 m² (1,593 sq ft) or so according to living space regulations) 🙁
Winniefred25 Apr 2023 07:44Well, then either the design is poor or your expectations are unrealistic^^. We live as a family of four in 88m² (950 sq ft), and while it could certainly be a bit larger in some areas, it works for us. I have no idea how anyone could not manage with twice that space.
W
WilderSueden25 Apr 2023 08:20There are some things that take up a lot of square meters. Large hallways, straight staircases, square rooms, bay windows. And then there are things that make rooms feel bigger. Plenty of light, long sight lines, and so on.
You can only really evaluate houses properly if you have the floor plan. A well-designed floor plan (and even an average one) easily accommodates 4 people within about 130m² (1400 sq ft).
You can only really evaluate houses properly if you have the floor plan. A well-designed floor plan (and even an average one) easily accommodates 4 people within about 130m² (1400 sq ft).
H
hanghaus202325 Apr 2023 08:21Show us an example (floor plans) of about 160 m2 (1,722 sq ft) that feels cramped to you.
I agree with [USER=52679]@WilderSueden.
It is often the straight staircase that takes up a lot of hallway space. On top of that, a solid wall or a closed door blocks the line of sight. The floor plan either allows for separation or openness. Separation doesn’t have to be negative; it can mean closing the door behind you and having your own private space, which is especially important for a household of four. But if you prefer an "open" style, window placement or clever transitions should help make even smaller rooms feel spacious. Furniture also plays a role: a bulky cabinet can make a large hallway feel oppressive, and a large sectional sofa can make a big lounge area seem smaller.
Why don’t you name some model homes so we can check which ones feel cramped and which ones feel restricting?
It is often the straight staircase that takes up a lot of hallway space. On top of that, a solid wall or a closed door blocks the line of sight. The floor plan either allows for separation or openness. Separation doesn’t have to be negative; it can mean closing the door behind you and having your own private space, which is especially important for a household of four. But if you prefer an "open" style, window placement or clever transitions should help make even smaller rooms feel spacious. Furniture also plays a role: a bulky cabinet can make a large hallway feel oppressive, and a large sectional sofa can make a big lounge area seem smaller.
Why don’t you name some model homes so we can check which ones feel cramped and which ones feel restricting?
schmeissrein25 Apr 2023 09:30Hello everyone 🙂
I completely agree with you – as I said, 160 square meters (approximately 1,722 square feet) seems like a lot in total, and I don’t understand why it feels so small on site. We now live in under 90 square meters (about 969 square feet), like you @Winniefred, and it doesn’t feel cramped either. However, we don’t have two floors, so there’s no staircase or hallway taking up space.
@WilderSueden
I also don’t understand what kind of mental block is limiting us here.
@ypg and @hanghaus2023
Unfortunately, the houses are not online, otherwise I would have shared them with you. For example, a plan similar to our sketch on page 23 was nice, but then the children’s rooms ended up being under 10 square meters (about 108 square feet) according to the living space regulations – which we don’t want. If we could somehow turn the three small rooms into two larger ones, that would already bring us much closer to our ideal. By the way, we are not fixed yet on the staircase’s position or its shape. The only important thing is that the staircase should not be directly in front of the entrance door, because then dirt gets tracked up all the time. Regarding sightlines, we’d like it if the view from the front door extends through to the garden (with double-leaf glass doors) into the open-plan living area.
I found some interesting floor plans under “Buss Bauunternehmen” in the four-gable house section and at “die Planerei” (references/four-gable house 151). If you feel like it, feel free to share your thoughts.
I completely agree with you – as I said, 160 square meters (approximately 1,722 square feet) seems like a lot in total, and I don’t understand why it feels so small on site. We now live in under 90 square meters (about 969 square feet), like you @Winniefred, and it doesn’t feel cramped either. However, we don’t have two floors, so there’s no staircase or hallway taking up space.
@WilderSueden
I also don’t understand what kind of mental block is limiting us here.
@ypg and @hanghaus2023
Unfortunately, the houses are not online, otherwise I would have shared them with you. For example, a plan similar to our sketch on page 23 was nice, but then the children’s rooms ended up being under 10 square meters (about 108 square feet) according to the living space regulations – which we don’t want. If we could somehow turn the three small rooms into two larger ones, that would already bring us much closer to our ideal. By the way, we are not fixed yet on the staircase’s position or its shape. The only important thing is that the staircase should not be directly in front of the entrance door, because then dirt gets tracked up all the time. Regarding sightlines, we’d like it if the view from the front door extends through to the garden (with double-leaf glass doors) into the open-plan living area.
I found some interesting floor plans under “Buss Bauunternehmen” in the four-gable house section and at “die Planerei” (references/four-gable house 151). If you feel like it, feel free to share your thoughts.
Similar topics