Barring the developer giving you a break and grandfathering you in (I mean really - you had already signed contracts...) sharing the cost is a nice thing if you can afford it. I would like to think that this kind of up front goodwill will serve you well in the future and you WILL get value out of it come appraisal time and for resale - so it's definitely not wasted.

If this is going to stretch you out of the gate - I'd say no. You should not have to sacrifice having to say no to a change you might want in the future if you feel forced to spend $ for this addition.

If you had known the change in square footage requirement, and had been required to pay for it yourself, would you have gone ahead and signed the contract? If the answer is yes, then you should accept the 50/50 offer and consider yourself lucky. If the answer is no, then I agree with jannicone.

Also what are they charging you per sq ft? If they charging you $200/sq ft - they are not meeting you halfway. You pay for labor and materials

thanks for the replies. It won't be a stretch money wise and in the long run is probably worth it like jannicone said for the extra value. I don't have the new proposed plans and contract addendum yet, but the price he gave is ~$100/sq ft and I'd pay half that so definitely meeting half way. My initial instinct was just to pay, but didn't want to find out down the road we got fleeced. The only difference if we knew up front is that we might have looked at a larger floor plan, rather than just tacking on a "study".

Really we gained a dining room because we were going to make the original dining room an office. No need for a formal dining room

At $50/sq ft, 120 sq ft, that's $600...no-brainer. The change order to add a rough-in for my wet bar was $650.

Your are missing a 0.... $50/ sq ft x 120 sq ft is $6,000

Maybe get them to add in some extra perk in the finishing, like a wider molding or building in a window seat somewhere. ;)

I dislike the idea of "tacking on" a room as an after thought. Will it work logically with the floor plan you have or will it look like an after thought?

And sorry, if the plans have been approved and the bank approved the loan, I don't see where the builder or developer can now come back and tell you that you need to tack on a room. Frankly I think at this point the developer needs to eat it. It's after the fact.

Frankly, $6,000 could get me some nice lighting for the house, an upgraded floor, new furniture or the beautiful tile I want and not just a room I'd never use.

There are perhaps other things to consider if you have time before making a decision. If you are getting your information from the builder, and have not spoken to the developer directly, perhaps you can find out if the developer will grant a waiver. A waiver might be quite justified in your situation. Or, does your plan have the option of finishing attic space that would give you the additional 120 you need without adding to the footprint? That should cost much less.

This isn't between you and the builder, it's between you and the developer. Deal directly with him/her.

Honestly I think Virgil gave you the best advice and to my mind something sounds fishy.

I'm glad I mentioned dealing directly with the developer and Virgil did as well. I don't agree that this isn't between you and the builder, since your contract is with the builder and you want a good relationship with the people building your home. But involving the developer is a good idea. It will help you get at the truth and a smart resolution.

Apparently my math skills are fading as I age.

I like the idea of ignoring the issue and forcing them to come after you, which they wouldn't do.

If you don't want a den take this opportunity to stretch the plan and increase the size of most of the rooms. The cost might be less as well. It should be easy to do with CAD drawings.

So to answer your question - I believe you should pay. Half is very fair and builders don't typically start out a house losing money, they just find another place to make it up. Your builder sounds like an upstanding guy and I doubt he would cut that many corners but he still has to protect his bottom line.

I would personally step back a bit and look at the plans again. You still have to live there and tacking on a small den seems like a bandage rather than a fix.

When did the developer increase the minimum square footage? Was it before or after your plans were approved? If after, I believe you would not be required to increase your house size.

If after, I believe you would not be required to increase your house size. -

Actually it should be what was in place when you (or the builder) purchased the lot. It would be hard to enforce a square footage increase on owners who bought the lot to build a smaller house.

Having said that, I would advise paying the $6,000 if you like the modification and just be done with it. I wouldn't advise starting out your knew home in a battle with the developer. Regardless of who is right or wrong, he can make your life harder with little risk of reciprocal annoyance, so why tempt fate.

i'm meeting with the builder tonight to review the proposed plan and discuss. You all have given me several good questions to ask so thank you. We only talked briefly over the phone yesterday and it caught me off guard so I didn't ask a lot of questions.

I agree with you there bry about trying not to make it an issue, if the extra $6k is not going to hurt them somewhere else.

However I also agree with JDS that instead of tacking on an office the OP doesn't want or need, they should just increase the overall square footage to make up the difference.

Good luck tonight. Please let us know what you come up with and if you have your signed contract, be sure to bring a copy along. Also you might want to ask for a copy of the building covenants and when the change was made.

If you must add footage, expand the plans rather than plop an extra little room onto the house. (What will hat do to your roof plan?) Why does this have to be 'footprint' space? Is there some attic you can make into HVAC-ed space -- maybe add a window or dormer?

You. You pay. Even if the cost ends up being "hidden" elsewhere, you will pay.

Exactly Mrs. Pete, some where it will cost you if lucky only what you refused.

I look at it this way. If you want to take it back to developer that is fine. Paying 50/50 is fair for the additional sqft. If you do agree to pay it might make any changes down the road with the builder easier providing leverage.

Sounds like this was an oversight by the builder and he's trying to CYA by putting it in your court. I think a meeting of minds is all that's necessary.

Who currently owns the lot?

I met with the builder and got things worked out. We agreed to pay half. The developer updated the minimum sq ft requirement b/n the time we initially decided on a floor plan with the builder and actually signed the sales contract, so it was in place before we signed. Builder admitted they ignored/missed the email notice. The subdivision is brand new and we'll be one of the first houses. That doesn't really affect any of this, but explains why the developer is still making changes.

We are using one of the builder's standard blueprints, and the addition doesn't impact the roof line or width of the footprint at all so it's an easier route compared to expanding rooms and impacting the upstairs and roof. According to the builder anyway. We're happy with the new floorplan and getting a deal on the sq footage in the end, so no harm no foul.

Good luck with the build!

Sounds like a win/win. Be sure to post in the monthly thread so we get to enjoy your progress

And you'll be happy that you have the additional square footage when it comes time to sell...

"That doesn't really affect any of this, but explains why the developer is still making changes."

This would concern me a bit. I would make sure that you are exempt from all future changes that the developer makes.