Renovation & Attic Expansion: KfW? Cost-effectiveness vs. New Construction?

The problem that my acquaintances also saw is that you invest a lot of money; during the renovation (as well as in new construction) you still have change requests and want this and that. In the end, you have spent a lot of money on a conversion, but you still have an old, albeit renovated, house. And you can usually tell, whether by the architecture, the low basement rooms, etc.
Therefore, I raised the idea to consider how much you could EXPECT to get for the house in x years without major renovation. If a new building minus the proceeds from the house costs about the same, for me there would only be a new building if this amount is currently affordable.

That is of course difficult to assess without further details. What is clear is that the renovation measures will not be reflected 1:1 in the value. That means the house will not be worth 250k€ afterwards. That is not always important, but for some people it is not insignificant. Then the question is, if the roof already needs renovation, the facade is at least no longer nice and energetically poor, and the heating system is also over 40 years old, what can actually still be achieved on the real estate market. If you now add the renovation of the ground floor, you are looking at around 200k€ in renovation costs (heating, ground floor, roof and facade + windows). First you have to find a buyer for that. It looks different if the house is on an expensive/desirable plot. Here you should consider whether to give up such a house and move to a new development area. Here you are often much further from the town center, have relatively small plots, and the infrastructure often still needs to develop (I once lived for 10 years in a construction street, which is very annoying). Maybe you also have an emotional attachment to the respective house. Have you already had an energy consultant/expert assess the current state and the possible renovated state? If you now emit 300-400kW/m² into the environment, then first you have to see whether it is a bottomless pit and whether you can actually get into the range of 50-100kW/m². Anything above that, in my view, would not be in proportion to the investment.

I know this is a difficult topic, but would it be possible to possibly accommodate the grandparents elsewhere? Of course, one never wants to throw their family out of the house, and I also don't know how much care they need, but from my point of view, these are definitely things that need to be considered nowadays. My grandparents were ultimately so in need of care (Alzheimer's + Parkinson's) that they could no longer be cared for at home and were then placed in a nursing home, where they also had an age-appropriate apartment and care. When I look at my parents' house, it is (many stairs, narrow doors, small bathrooms, huge house) almost impossible to create a barrier-free apartment there. Maybe it would even be a win/win situation if they moved into an age-appropriate apartment that is near you.

Of course, this is all just speculation (since I don't know your situation well enough). Nothing would be worse than if you now renovate/convert the roof at great expense and next year the ground-floor apartment becomes available. Then you would also have to renovate that, possibly with money that might no longer be available. Without the roof expansion (possibly with ceiling insulation on the upper floor) you could save 100,000€ for now, if the roof is still in a decent condition.

You would first probably have to consider whether you really want to stay in the house, or if you are not that attached to it. Otherwise, if it is financially feasible, perhaps a new building with a [senior-friendly granny flat] that can be rented out later might also be an idea?

Hello everyone,

thank you very much for your feedback and assessments. Let me briefly say a few sentences about this:

[...]That’s why I raised the idea to consider how much you could APPROXIMATELY get for the house in x years without major renovation. If a new build minus the proceeds from the house costs about the same, for me there would only be a new build if that amount is currently financeable.

That is, of course, a logical line of thought. However, it is not possible, details gladly via PM. The alternative to remodeling & modernization would only be the "100%" new build without later selling the existing property. That means you would have to calculate with the full amount here (minus equity).

[...] Have you ever had an energy consultant/expert assess the current state and the possible renovated condition? If you now release 300-400 kW/m² into the environment, you first have to see whether that is not a bottomless pit and whether you can actually get into the range of 50-100 kW/m².[...]

Yes, there have already been various energy calculations and considerations in this regard. Currently, consumption is probably just under 200 kW/m2. With the measures mentioned above, depending on the extent, one would get to 50-60 kW/m2. We are currently having checked what ultimately the energetically most sensible combination of measures would be (or, for example, whether forgoing KfW and rather making targeted optimizations might be an alternative). The overall condition is not that bad, especially the insulation of the facade, from my purely energetic point of view, would not necessarily be economical. As I said, there would also be optical aspects involved.
The roof would also not necessarily have to be renewed from the outside. Basically, it would probably be enough to do a clean job from the inside. The idea came up rather in the context of the solar system topic so that one would not have to tackle it again in 10 years. But yes, eventually it all adds up...

[...] Nothing would be more unfavorable than if you now convert/expand the roof at great expense and next year the ground floor apartment becomes free. You would then have to renovate that as well with money that might no longer be available. Without roof expansion (possibly with ceiling insulation in the upper floor) you could save 100k€ for the time being, if the roof is still in a bearable condition.

Sure, the attic conversion is only temporarily absolutely necessary. I completely agree with you here (see your first post), there is quite a lot of potential for savings here. The topic of plumbing mainly has the background that I find it very useful if (small) children move on this floor and there is a sanitary facility there (at least a toilet + washbasin).

The basic value was once cautiously estimated at just over 100k (with appropriate heating it would be somewhat more). This also roughly corresponds to what house sales in the area currently suggest. But as I said, nice & affordable plots are currently very difficult to get.

In terms of numbers, remodeling + modernization (after subsidies deducted) currently stands for me at 180-200k compared to a new build at about 380-400k.
Overall, a very difficult topic where you eventually just go around in circles :-(

Hello,

for me, the topic is also very difficult. In your last post, you compare old building with new building. Of course, there is about €200,000 between the two, but you also have to see how satisfied you are with the current situation. Are the rooms in the old building sufficient? Windows, view, layout, etc., or do I say, "this or that should/must have been solved better." (Specifically referring to the currently inhabited upper floor)

Your concern does not seem to be to change anything about the room layout in the upper floor, so you have to ask yourself whether you are satisfied or accept it as it is because it was a gift? I am currently in a similar situation and do not view it so much from the budget perspective, but rather for the above reasons it is the house with the layout in which I want to spend my retirement.

All stated objections are correct and important. However, as long as this fundamental question is not clarified, I think one must first be clear about it.