the next property offer...

Hello everyone,

we are still looking and have now been offered an affordable plot of land again - but the whole thing sounds a bit 'strange':

- first there was allegedly already a "firm interested buyer" along with a "notarization appointment coming up shortly", yet the plot was still being offered on a major portal
- three weeks later it was still online, "as already communicated ... firmly reserved", the surveying costs were now completed (strange wording) and the notarization appointment firmly scheduled.
- then after a few more weeks came "is available again, was meanwhile surveyed with x m2"?!

Upon inquiry, the realtor then informed us that the plot is fully developed, the supply lines are in the street, and the disposal goes to the sewer on the neighboring plot (easement will be registered) - that also seems to be the plot from which the current one was 'subdivided'.

In addition to notary and court fees as well as real estate transfer tax, there are also broker commissions (I hate that, because I did not order him) plus x EUR surveying costs to be added - why? Or rather: is that customary? The surveying was already done, and we did not order/commission it...

According to the district office, sewer construction fees have been paid, but what reads strange again is the sentence: "these costs, just like the surveying costs, do not belong to the development costs and must always be borne by the buyer" - who says that? Is that the law or their wishful thinking? And now we should also pay the sewer costs???

The buyer must create access at their own expense, but that does not seem unusual to me.

The development is subject there to §34 of the Building Code (neighborhood development), do the 'usual' building setbacks of 3m to the property boundary, for example, also apply? Or is *everything* freely negotiable? The federal state would be Lower Saxony, if that matters.

Thanks for your opinions on this,

b.

Hello BauPaar,

the assumption of surveying costs and other incidental expenses is of course negotiable here, but the question is whether the seller agrees to it. The costs can also be passed on by the seller to the land price, which means the price per square meter simply increases by x euros.

Regarding the §34 area concerning the setback distance:

You have to or may adapt to the local conditions. If a setback distance of 2m or 2.5m is common and verifiable all around, this type of construction can usually be claimed for oneself as well; the question is whether one wants that and whether it makes sense. A (good!) counterargument is fire protection – the risk of fire spreading with only 4m between building parts is higher than with 6m in between. Extinguishing and rescue operations also become more difficult, aside from the fact that the buildings then stand very close to each other. You then have to carefully argue this to the building authority and the fire department must approve or rescue/access in case of fire must be guaranteed.

NDS is afaik still based on the standard of 3m, other states nowadays also allow development plans with smaller distances in certain areas with zoning plans or intentionally different structures.

Is the plot really so narrow that you would have to maximize use on both sides? If yes, your architect should explore which setback distances the building authority considers acceptable.

From a very practical point of view, I would not plan below 3m myself; that is the absolute minimum for a garage and if you later want to build something in the garden or extend the house, at 2m setback distance you can only get in with small machines or have to ask the neighbors...

So I would only recommend the reduced setback distance if the plot is really so narrow that it cannot be satisfactorily developed with normal setback distances.

Best regards Dirk Grafe

Thank you for the answers!

We don't necessarily want to go below 3m, especially for escape route reasons. It was just a "could you...?" for planning scenarios :)

The surveying costs that are handled through the land purchase, i.e. included, only concern the subdivision survey so that "your" plot also receives its own parcel number. Or put simply, so that you can even buy the piece of land.

But why do they list that separately? When I buy a car, I don’t pay for the fact that my standard seats are delivered to the factory either?!

I think you’re mixing things up a bit here. The sewer construction fees concern the creation of the sewer connection in the street, the development costs concern the part of the sewer in the street up to the yet-to-be-built single-family house on "your" property. These costs are always borne by the buyer and are part of the incidental building costs. Deviations can be arranged in the notary contract.

That’s what the realtor said, which is why I was also confused... Or they meant the neighbor’s sewer connection costs, to whose sewer we are supposed to connect.

Ok, we’ll take a look at it in daylight over the weekend, then there might be new questions...

But why do they specify that separately?

Maybe because of the basis for calculating the real estate transfer tax?

I even like the argument :)

Trying to see if it works is another matter. Costs for the nasty M-word are often also percentage-based. So it could also have an effect here.