It seems logical to let Sue flats with many small, dark rooms, to find flats with fewer dependencies but much more large, well-lit and comfortable, it will be in them where inhabit, and to the end and after, these rooms small in the end only end up used as storerooms. That 50-55 m2 housing is most expensive in proportion to one of 100 m2 is logical. Both have a kitchen with a team and finishes, which is what basically makes a home. Consequently, the impact of kitchen or bathroom m2 per m2 of housing is greater in a House of 50 m2 which not one of 100 or a chalet. Put another way, if the price in euro/m2 we pay for an apartment of 100 m2 is the same as in an apartment of 50 m2, we should demand the House of 100 m2 to carry two kitchens. Other circumstances much more relevant than the area to be considered would be: 1. condition of the property; If it is brand new, refurbished integrally, refurbished partially, or to rehabilitate. Eye when it is renovated, and in reality have been replaced only the kitchen or some bathroom tiles.
The best choice without any doubt is a dwelling obtained by change of use to local, since in that case is virtually new building with facilities and new equipment, conditions of habitability for new housing; and pricing of used housing price!. What we can say, a bargain. That if, which is always writing as housing and not local. 2. the m2 of housing quality. If they are outdoor or indoor, possibilities of natural ventilation and light. Proportion of external facade and window in relation to habitable square metres. Views, orientation. 3.-finishes. That you do not give swindle, a simple parquet and an aluminum lacquered white called them finishes first (reality is that they are finished third).