This is something I’m curious about that is tied to housing shortages… As in, say a hypothetical government want to encourage real-estate develpers to build more housing to solve housing shortages. But said government still wants to make most of its citizens happy, instead of just cramming everyone in the smallest accommodations possible
As extreme examples:
- A shoebox studio (<= 10 m^2) is probably too small for almost any family
- On the contrary… a massive estate (>= 10,000 m^2) is probably too big for almost any family. At that point, upkeep of the house may need several full-time housekeepers, so you literally won’t have time to do it yourself
I’d imagine there might be some cultural differences regarding this as well…?
0.4 dam2 for a house sounds pretty small… does that only account for area-under-the-roof? Also, do you have a terrace?
It is quite small, much smaller than what would be legal to build under current regulations. It was originally built as a weekend retreat, not a full-time residence.
I have a terrace, and a reasonable parcel of land. My intention is to build a freestanding garage/workshop next to it, which would alleviate most of my space concerns. The house is built on a steep slope, with a sort of crawl space beneath it, and what is, quite frankly, a woefully inadequate foundation. Eventually, I’d like to jack the building up and build a proper basement.