ᐅ Building Living Space on Existing Property – Looking for Ideas

Hello everyone,

I’m generally not a big fan of building a house, as I see higher living costs and less flexibility in a house. However, the first issue changes, especially if you can build on existing land. The property in question is a three-sided farmstead (residential house, barn, garage) with green space around it. Since all the possibilities I have in mind are “special cases,” I wanted to gather some initial information about which option might make sense to investigate further.

The preference is for a single-story house (because I like large rooms but don’t need 250m² (2700 sq ft)) without a basement and space for two people (so no children’s rooms, etc.). It should be relatively modern and full of natural light, so somewhat higher costs for windows should be expected. All options depend on the building permit / planning permission required, which certainly varies case by case, but maybe someone can give an initial assessment.

Option 1: New house on the adjacent meadow:
New houses on adjacent meadows (usually from farms) are often built for personal use, even though there is no local development plan from the municipality in this area. The three-sided farmstead is not isolated, but there is also no development plan. What are the chances that the municipality would approve a new build on the adjacent meadow (without “I know someone who…”)? In the past, another adjacent meadow was rezoned for building land. What are the construction costs excluding the land but including utility connections? Would this option save a significant amount?

Option 2: Extension to the existing building.
Here, it is of course unclear whether an extension is allowed. The disadvantage would be that the extension would have to be on the west side, so there would be no southern windows (unless the extension is built at a distance of several meters from the existing building). The advantage, however, is that if the utility connections are sufficiently sized, no new utility connections might be necessary(?).

Option 3: Conversion of the barn.
This option would technically be the nicest or most individual solution. However, from what I have read, you should expect higher costs than with a new build. The plot is already available, and new connections might not be necessary. So wouldn’t a large portion of the new build costs already be eliminated?

As a layperson, this is often wishful thinking, and reality quickly sets in (building permit impossible / costs higher than new build plus land). What information would be necessary for an assessment? Which option might have a chance of success?

HausbauD schrieb:
Option 1: New house on adjacent meadow: For personal use, new houses are often seen on adjacent meadows (mostly from farms), even though there is no official development plan from the municipality in the area. The three-sided farmyard is not an isolated house, but there is also no development plan. What are the chances that the municipality would allow a new build on the adjacent meadow (without "I know someone ...")? In the past, another adjacent meadow was rezoned for building land. How high are the construction costs excluding the land but including utility connections? Would this save a noticeable amount?

Option 2: Extension to existing building. Here, too, it is unclear whether an extension would be permitted. The disadvantage would be that the extension would have to be on the west side. So, there are no southern-facing windows (unless the extension is built with several meters distance from the existing structure). The advantage is probably that, provided the utility connections are sufficiently sized, no new utility connections would be necessary (?).

Option 3: Conversion of the barn. This option would of course be the most architecturally attractive or individually designed solution. However, from what is commonly read, one must expect higher costs than new construction. But since the plot is already available, new utility connections might not be necessary. Wouldn't a large part of the costs of new construction then be saved?

Since I am a layperson, this is often wishful thinking, and reality catches up quickly (building permit impossible / costs higher than new build + land). What information would be necessary for evaluation? Which option would have a realistic chance of approval?

If your property is located in an unzoned rural area (which is likely, since it is an old farm), the probable answer for all options is: Not possible, as they are not eligible for approval.

You will get clarity by consulting with the local authority or submitting a preliminary building enquiry.

P.S. Why do you expect potential savings with your options – the costs will be similar? What difference does this make for ongoing costs? Do you currently have greater flexibility?

...where exactly this kind of project was approved in the village two weeks ago: an outdoor area, an additional residential building next to a farmhouse, passed by the local council.

Matthew03 schrieb:
...where exactly this was approved two weeks ago in the village: rural area, additional residential building next to a farmhouse, passed by the local council.

Who is building there? Keyword "Altenteiler" (retiree dwelling).

Take a look at Section 35 of the Federal Building Code to understand what is permitted and what is not. Is it a Section 35 area or rather a Section 34? Have you already spoken with the building authority?

What about the other two buildings on the property (besides the barn)? Are they inhabited?

nordanney schrieb:
Who is building there? Keyword: "Altenteiler" (elderly resident builder)

Have a look at Section 35 of the Building Code; then you'll know what is allowed and what is not. Is it within a Section 35 area or more likely a Section 34? Have you already talked to the building authority?

I'm not the original poster 😉
Just wanted to say that exceptions can exist. In this specific case, I don't know the details, only that a new building was approved on the meadow next to the farmstead, referred to as an "exception" in the report from the municipal council meeting...