Financing two semi-detached houses through the sale of one half.

For me, a lot of this is unclear - I'll try to summarize:

- there is a piece of land with a house on it, which has now been inherited by 3 parties - ok, understood
- total value currently about €1.5 million - I come to that through the 3 heirs and the €500k per heir. Is that correct?
- one of the three wants to sell, one wants to live under the roof (where? in the existing house?), one wants a construction project

Now comes the first point I don't understand: where are you in the system? You write that YOU could pay out one party - so are you basically party 4? Because then the colleague who only wants the money (in my view the smartest) would be out and you three could come to an agreement...

... which I see as extremely difficult, because: what do remaining parties 2 and 3 want to contribute?

Also, I don't quite understand your calculation:

- you want to build two semi-detached houses - ok, understood
- one of them is to be sold to repay the construction costs - ok, understood
- another is to be rented out - ok, that gets interesting, because now
- one is to be occupied by you and another party (5?) - uh, how now... 3 halves?

Summary: apart from the fact that the whole story doesn't make sense to me, I definitely wouldn't do something like that - there are far too many cooks stirring the pot...

PS: otherwise a nice example of the still widespread disease in large parts of Germany of "real estate and land just aren't sold"...

PPS: are land prices already that crazy in Darmstadt too? I only knew that from Munich so far...

PPS: Are the property prices already this crazy in Darmstadt too? I only knew that from Munich so far...

Aunt Google says €600 (next to the proverbial sewage treatment plant) - €1,300 next to the Geissens...

if the property is worth 1.5 million, it is not worth building only a semi-detached house on it. You will find neither a buyer nor a tenant at a reasonable price. If you don't have the money to buy out the others, then all the more reason not to build the house. No developer makes 100% profit and they buy significantly cheaper than you do.

If you don’t have the money to pay out the others, then you definitely don’t have the money to build the house.

From my point of view, the essential gap/discrepancy lies between or within the simultaneous wanting to give away and keep. In principle, there are beef halves, but only both in the slaughterhouse or both in the stable. You can’t slaughter and milk the same cow at the same time, Schrödinger cows have not yet been invented.

If the plot is worth 1.5 million, it’s not worthwhile to build only a semi-detached house on it. You won’t find a buyer or a tenant for an appropriate price.

On the contrary: in highly sought-after prime locations, people even fight over middle house waiting list spots, and this applies both to owner-occupiers and for rental purposes. It is not reason but location that defines what “appropriate” prices are.

I consider the by far most sensible solutions to be deciding between a full sale and building a three-family house – however, this enhancement of the property will not be gifted by magic: one apartment for the heir with an attic apartment wish, one apartment for the OP, and the third will annuitize the third heir with its rental income. Alternatively, this could also be done as a condominium (WEG), as far as I know up to three residential units can still be self-managed.

The three-family house would be an option if really fancy condominiums are planned in this location - because no one pays for the expensive land just to live in an 89 m² three-room apartment. We're talking about design / terrace / penthouse with private access / gardener.

Not affordable with the financial ceiling...

Two friendly brothers once sold their parents' house in A+ location in our city - now THREE really expensive houses stand on the plot (these plots were only sold in minimum size after the war) and the two guys each built themselves a really fancy house in a suburb and paid cash. I see that as more reasonable here.

Two brothers who were friends once sold their parental home in AAAAA+++++ location in our city – now there are THREE really expensive houses on the property (these plots were only allotted in minimum size after the war) and both guys each built themselves a really fat mansion in a suburb and paid cash... I see that as more sensible here.

I would also prefer a clear separation between business and owner-occupied dimension.

The triplex would be an option if, in this location, truly luxurious condominiums were planned – because no one pays for the expensive land just to live in an 89 m² three-room apartment. Then we are talking about design / terrace / penthouse with private entrance / gardener pliplaplo.

Au contraire. The more expensive the location, the larger the market for well-earning singles, for whom 89 sqm is already almost the upper limit.