Dear existing property with renovation or new construction

  • Erstellt am 2020-01-02 11:37:20

Tolentino

2020-01-02 18:25:53
  • #1
Actually not necessarily money, I am aware that some additional costs would come with it. Personally, it's more about the larger property and the clearly better location (as mentioned, this is rather disputed by my partner, even though she already liked it better when passing by).

And based purely on documents, we could move into number 1 right away; only if more children came would we really be forced to renovate.
With number 2, we would definitely have to do some initial painting and floor laying before moving in.

Well, after the viewing I will know more.

Thanks for now !
 

Joedreck

2020-01-02 18:38:36
  • #2
If money is not an issue, there is nothing against number 1. Then move in downstairs, have the upstairs done, move, have the downstairs done. But from your answers I gather that money is not in abundance. But first have a look. Maybe you don't even like it. If so, then at the second appointment bring an expert who is experienced with old buildings.
 

Tolentino

2020-01-02 19:12:54
  • #3
I currently have a maximum budget of 650k.
With 2, I am afraid that something might go wrong during the new build (unforeseen additional costs), making the house uninhabitable in the medium term and forcing us into a distress sale at a loss.
With 1, at least we could live in it initially and possibly wait with larger necessary cost blocks (breakthroughs, moving load-bearing walls) until more money is available again.
I find it hard to assess which risk is higher. And then there is risk in the probability of occurrence and in the maximum damage (qualitatively and quantitatively). How does each project score there?
Best regards
Tolentino
 

Tassimat

2020-01-02 21:07:36
  • #4
I actually find the decision simple:

House No. 1 (from 1940) has already been renovated twice (1995 and 2010). It may be that everything was done perfectly and it still suits you. But it may also be that it was botched, or that the renovation from 25 years ago is already worn out and shabby. To put it bluntly. Regardless of the condition, the house costs as much as your planned new build. So either it is immediately in a good condition for you, where you might only need to paint, or I would stay away from it. Because every renovation measure quickly becomes very expensive. Then it's simply better to build new.

Maybe it also helps for the comparison to break down the purchase price into land value (standard land value), €/m² living space + extras like garage and garden, then you have a nicer comparison.
 

hampshire

2020-01-02 23:02:22
  • #5
We also faced the question old or new. We would have chosen old if a suitable property had excited us. So it ended up being new. In your situation, besides financial security, I would also let your hearts speak: Where would you rather live? Something can always happen, whether luck or misfortune. To me, old seems less certain in terms of total investment but more secure regarding flexible affordability, as part can be rented out for a while and generate returns. This makes you freer to explore and act.
 

Tolentino

2020-01-05 18:27:03
  • #6
Dear people,

in the meantime we have viewed property 1 and there is indeed more to do than you could see from the first pictures.

The condition is indeed to be considered worn out, though according to my layman assessment, most of the issues are superficial topics that you can mostly actually do yourself.
Pipes (electricity & water) all seem reasonably in good shape and at least made of copper (although of course I don’t know what they look like inside the walls).
All walls need painting/wallpapering and the floors would probably need to be redone as well.
There was apparently water damage in one room where the suspended ceiling was only crudely repaired (plasterboard from below) and the baseboard is affected. But all those spots were dry.
There was no musty smell (not even in the basement).

The biggest drawback is, as expected, the layout. Most rooms are very small. Because of the multiple bathrooms and kitchens, the living spaces are very cramped. So a lot would need to be repositioned.
I am still waiting for an answer as to which of the thick walls on the ground floor are load-bearing (the thin ones are drywall). But I fear that for a reasonable design, you would indeed need a solid extension, which would have to include the current conservatory + hallway + a bit more to the lower and right side of the plan.
Finally, an internal staircase would still need to be realized.
How much could something like that cost? Could you manage with 100k?

Attached are the floor plans (today) and some impressions.









 

Similar topics
11.06.2013Radiator in the new building?13
13.10.2020Renovate a used house or build a new one13
12.10.2013New construction on communal property, tax issue16
22.11.2013Costs of inheritance, demolition, new construction15
06.02.2017Insulate new construction 36.5 aerated concrete?60
05.08.2014New single-family house (KFW70)/aerated concrete vs. sand-lime brick/what to use?71
15.06.2015New construction: Plaster the concrete ceiling on the ground floor18
28.02.2016Buy a house, renovate or build new?41
04.01.2017Plaster walls in new construction or use fleece?16
12.01.2018Possible thermal bridges in house wall corners in new construction10
23.03.2018House from the 1930s. Renovate or rebuild?25
15.09.2020New single-family house or core renovation of a house built in 197839
10.01.2022Assessment of Financing New Construction 425k € / Overall Financial Situation257
21.08.2021Walls painter fleece / ceiling lime paint?22
01.07.2022Painting work in new construction by own effort27
16.02.2023Painting new construction by own effort32
03.03.2023Wallpaper or plaster? Which is better in new construction?96
13.11.2023Painter's fleece / renovation fleece vs. textured wallpaper in new construction17
26.08.2024Buy a house with electric heating? Or a new terraced house?30
23.01.2025New construction or existing property? House or apartment?15

Oben