Semi-detached house in building area 8.5m x 15m (WxD)

That you of all people join the chorus of advocates for ancient buildings, I truly did not expect... [...} What surprises me more is that precisely the issue of protection of existing rights is a driver for the (partial) preservation of a junk house.

What have you been smoking, and why do you portray me as someone who would otherwise be a quick, blindly furious demolisher? – unlike you, I would never categorically label a house from 1935 as junk; on the contrary: that is a much more solid building era than one twenty years younger. And I am rather known for always recommending at least a benevolent examination of the existing cellar. The only thing I crumple up quickly are model house drawings. What I still haven’t understood is: what makes you so deeply stuck on forcing a duplex at all costs on this poor, exemplarily unsuitable plot – did the co-builder give you half the money for the land and now, as Frau Altkanzlerin would have said, it’s “without alternative,” to be realized if necessary with the last breath?

What have you been smoking, and why do you portray me as someone who otherwise would be a quick, blindly angry demolisher? -

Here I apologize. I did not mean to accuse you of that at all. In the past, I had gained the impression that your posts suggest new construction. But that probably referred more to people who are still looking for a plot and less to those who are facing the question of demolition or renovation. But all good – I understand.

Unlike you, I would never simply call a house from 1935 junk; on the contrary: that is a much more solid construction period than twenty years younger. And I am rather known for always recommending a benevolent inspection of at least the existing basement.

As a rule of thumb, the economic lifespan of a house is about 100 years. If one wants to extend that, one must (ideally continuously) invest in maintenance. In my case, that was rather neglected. Furthermore, the house was explicitly marketed as a demolition house, and that is why I purchased the plot (with house) below the standard ground value. Therefore, I hardly dealt with the house – also at the viewing – and also afterwards.

Please excuse me: it reads as if after the purchase you were no longer on the property and/or you never really took a closer look at the old house and let it have an effect on you.

That is actually true. But the reason is not ignorance but lack of access. The notary planted it into the sellers’ minds to only hand over the keys to me after the purchase price was paid and the land register entry was made. The first two weeks after the appointment passed with waiting for the priority notice of conveyance; now we have been waiting for several weeks for the municipality’s waiver of pre-emption right. After that, several more weeks will probably pass until the land register entry is made. Until then, I can neither enter the house nor the property (except the front garden, which is accessible). If I assess my impression from the many years of forum history, then I perceive it this way: If such an old house in poor condition is preserved, there is at least one of these reasons:

[*]Historic preservation
[*]Rural area/outskirts
[*]particularly beautiful (irreplaceable) architecture
[*]Terraced middle house (and thus difficult to demolish)

None of these points apply to me. If your elephant memory brings up a thread where demolition vs. renovation of a very old house was discussed without one of the aforementioned points being present, then I would be very pleased about a link.

What I haven’t understood yet is: what makes you so determined to force a semi-detached house onto this poor, exemplary unsuitable plot at all costs –

Oh dear, that is curious.

Look here:

Yes. With fallback options: two-family house, multi-family house, single-family house. But the single-family house would financially push us to the limit.

Yes, the thread title is semi-detached house—and it would also be a preferred solution. But I have pointed out several times that it does not have to be if it does not work or involves other major disadvantages.

: Photos, development plan and so on.

Meanwhile, I wonder how old the old stock actually is, whether everything is really as you represent it. Many suppress truths, do not want to hear, and in dialogue a lot of relevant things are presented differently than they are, just because there is no other option than Plan A.

Old stock is 90 years, I did write. Which suppressed truths do you mean? That the old stock is worth preserving in some way—well, I may have suppressed that (until the architects addressed it), but that is not yet a "truth."

As soon as I can get in again: Which spots are to be photographed? Critical points where you can see something about the condition? I know – that doesn’t replace a visit by a building expert. But what do you pay attention to in photos?

The architect advised not to write off the existing building stock immediately, let alone to demolish it hastily. If it is included, this would (depending on how comprehensively this is done) massively increase the degrees of freedom in verschiedenen Bereichen die Freiheitsgrade massiv erhöhen, because one could then make use of its existing protection.

This is the crucial point as to why the review and, if necessary, renovation at new construction cost level can be worthwhile.

In the past, I had gained the impression that your posts suggested new construction. However, that probably concerned people who are still looking for land and less those who face the question of demolition or renovation.

I warn people like you against confusing existing plots with building plots (legally created building rights, physically virgin meadows). And I know that—at least on a rule-of-thumb level—a used property can only be rejuvenated up to half its age until breakeven in terms of new construction–equivalent building costs.

As a principle for orientation, an economic lifespan of a house of about 100 years applies. If you want to extend it, you have to (ideally continuously) invest in maintenance.

It is more likely for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a non-merchant to understand the difference between tax-related and economic useful life.

Furthermore, the house was explicitly marketed as a demolition house, and that is why I purchased the plot (with house) below the standard land value.

The former primarily has warranty reasons, and the more real a demolition readiness is, the more correct and fair it is to take into account the development of the plot to a cleared state. How to proceed most wisely here will be revealed to you by one of my lawyers after seven barrels of wine.

If such an old house in poor condition is preserved, then there is at least one of these reasons: [...] None of these points apply to me.

For that, your existing building may well have the qualities of, from a building law perspective, what is called a "carrier pigeon" in car dealer jargon, hehe.

Which repressed truths do you mean?

For example slope, narrowness, parking spaces, emergency exit, floor area

Which places are supposed to be photographed?

Well, honestly, some photos of the property from the street could have been posted. Also the access roads of the neighborhood or similar things that you describe here would be helpful. This can also be done anonymously so that the neighbors do not obviously appear online.