ᐅ Should I first look for a building plot or a shell house (shell construction)?
Created on: 21 May 2009 15:23
U
UrmelHello
We are planning to build a house in the future!
First, I am thinking about buying a building plot. I would like to purchase the land and then start looking for a nice shell house to expand!
1. Is it true that I only have "12 months" to build a house on the plot? I was told that this is legally required?!
2. What do you think about the idea of buying the land first and then searching for a house?
I would be very grateful for any tips and suggestions from you!
Best regards, Urmel
We are planning to build a house in the future!
First, I am thinking about buying a building plot. I would like to purchase the land and then start looking for a nice shell house to expand!
1. Is it true that I only have "12 months" to build a house on the plot? I was told that this is legally required?!
2. What do you think about the idea of buying the land first and then searching for a house?
I would be very grateful for any tips and suggestions from you!
Best regards, Urmel
It’s not a bad idea to first look for a suitable plot of land and then build the appropriate house on it. There are no legal requirements specifying how quickly you must build, but some regulations, for example from the local municipality, may include preemption rights if construction does not begin within a certain timeframe. However, this is likely to be the exception.
Thank you, wabe.
I'm really getting desperate :-(
We just can’t seem to decide whether to build a solid "brick by brick" house ourselves or go for a prefabricated house and have it built...
We would definitely save money with a shell construction (self-build)...
But what about a prefabricated house in about 30 years?
A house built with masonry has the advantage then, right?
Thanks and best regards
I'm really getting desperate :-(
We just can’t seem to decide whether to build a solid "brick by brick" house ourselves or go for a prefabricated house and have it built...
We would definitely save money with a shell construction (self-build)...
But what about a prefabricated house in about 30 years?
A house built with masonry has the advantage then, right?
Thanks and best regards
Hello Urmel,
Every type of construction has its own advantages and disadvantages.
The main advantage of a prefabricated house is the relatively short construction time on-site, since all wall, ceiling, and roof elements are already preassembled in the factory. These are usually catalog designs, and custom requests will generally increase the cost accordingly. Once completed in the factory, changes are hardly possible. In timber frame construction, which most prefab house manufacturers use, careful workmanship is absolutely essential; otherwise, significant and even dangerous construction defects can occur.
A solid masonry house built stone by stone requires a much longer construction period on-site. Custom floor plan requests can be much easier to implement during the planning phase. In collaboration with a good architect or structural engineer, such a house can also be planned to be future-proof. Children are born, they grow up, eventually move out or bring partners home. Many things change over the course of a lifetime; life is not rigid. A well-designed house from the start allows most changes to be made without excessive effort.
From my experience, a locally built solid house is generally more cost-effective than a prefabricated house of the same size. Architect and engineer fees are typically included in the purchase price of a prefab house.
When building a house in cooperation with a trusted architect or structural engineer, you maintain full decision-making freedom at all times and complete cost transparency (which contractor should perform which trade at what price, which work you want to do yourself, and how much money you save, etc.).
Those who want to contribute a lot of self-labor should know it requires a significant time investment on-site. It is very rare to save more than about 20% of construction costs through typical owner participation. Usually, the savings are around 10 to 15%, which already involves a great deal of hands-on work.
In my opinion, the long-term value retention of a solidly built masonry house is significantly higher than that of a timber frame prefab house.
From these points, you can clearly see that I am more of an advocate of the traditional “stone on stone” method.
I also agree that starting by finding a plot of land is the right approach. However, it can be helpful to consult an architect or structural engineer at this stage as well. They can tell you exactly what is possible on the intended plot and what is not.
I hope this makes your decision a little easier now.
Every type of construction has its own advantages and disadvantages.
The main advantage of a prefabricated house is the relatively short construction time on-site, since all wall, ceiling, and roof elements are already preassembled in the factory. These are usually catalog designs, and custom requests will generally increase the cost accordingly. Once completed in the factory, changes are hardly possible. In timber frame construction, which most prefab house manufacturers use, careful workmanship is absolutely essential; otherwise, significant and even dangerous construction defects can occur.
A solid masonry house built stone by stone requires a much longer construction period on-site. Custom floor plan requests can be much easier to implement during the planning phase. In collaboration with a good architect or structural engineer, such a house can also be planned to be future-proof. Children are born, they grow up, eventually move out or bring partners home. Many things change over the course of a lifetime; life is not rigid. A well-designed house from the start allows most changes to be made without excessive effort.
From my experience, a locally built solid house is generally more cost-effective than a prefabricated house of the same size. Architect and engineer fees are typically included in the purchase price of a prefab house.
When building a house in cooperation with a trusted architect or structural engineer, you maintain full decision-making freedom at all times and complete cost transparency (which contractor should perform which trade at what price, which work you want to do yourself, and how much money you save, etc.).
Those who want to contribute a lot of self-labor should know it requires a significant time investment on-site. It is very rare to save more than about 20% of construction costs through typical owner participation. Usually, the savings are around 10 to 15%, which already involves a great deal of hands-on work.
In my opinion, the long-term value retention of a solidly built masonry house is significantly higher than that of a timber frame prefab house.
From these points, you can clearly see that I am more of an advocate of the traditional “stone on stone” method.
I also agree that starting by finding a plot of land is the right approach. However, it can be helpful to consult an architect or structural engineer at this stage as well. They can tell you exactly what is possible on the intended plot and what is not.
I hope this makes your decision a little easier now.
Similar topics