A lot is a lot is a lot ...

From the Wall Street Journal ...
FISCALLY FIT By TERRI CULLEN

The McMansion Effect
The Cullens' Neighborhood Is Super-Sizing,
So What Does It Mean for Terri's Home?
July 26, 2007

Our neighborhood is changing. A number of homes are undergoing major renovations that will double their sizes, and new homes are being built that are much larger than existing homes in the community. Our three-bedroom, one-and-a-half bath, 2,400-sq.-ft. home, once among the largest in the neighborhood, will soon be among the smallest.

The building boom has given Gerry and me pause. What impact is the sudden McMansioning of our neighborhood going to have on the value of our home? And will the super-sizing of nearby homes have any affect on our neighborhood's culture? Is it cause for concern, or are we just jealous? ...

Good to read a dialogue about the changes that have taken place in the assumptions about real estate.

For example, this was the guiding principal for real estate in thru the end of the 90's. As Cullen states, "When shopping for homes, the general rule of thumb is to avoid buying the largest home in the neighborhood. A home that's much bigger than other homes in the neighborhood will typically sell for less than if that same home were in a neighborhood with equally large homes. Why? Recent home sales help determine the fair-market value of your home. If no comparably large homes have been sold in your area, it may be difficult to convince home buyers that the larger home is worth considerably more than recent sales of smaller homes in the neighborhood."

Continuing, "On the other hand, having a medium-sized house in a neighborhood with much larger homes can boost its resale value. So in a situation like ours, where larger, more expensive homes are now more common than our home, my neighbors' home renovations should help to improve our home's value. Adding to its value is our lot size -- with an acre of land there's plenty of room for a home-buyer to add on to the home."

Ah ha, now I beg to differ. According to the City of Raleigh property valuation formulas, a lot is a lot. Current ITB real estate research shows lots valued at $100K on the Wake County Property Tax site. The new tax valuations will be $200-300K for the same lot, neighborhood depending. If you look around the site, you will notice a .25 acre lot is the same value as a .60 acre lot.

What gives?

Is this driving the land rush? In the above example, if this was in my neighborhood, that house is a goner. Either that lot will be bought and sold again as multiple lots, each for the current per-lot valuation, or that house will be replaced by something more "fitting" for such a large parcel. And fitting, nowadays, means FITTING. As in, the lot provides a small border of land (called required setback) around as big a house as can be fit within its bounds.

As a general rule, these homes have little connection to the surroundings. They are like islands in the midst of their chosen neighborhoods (translation: location location).

So, yes Terri, your value will rise with the changes in the neighborhood, you can verify this in your property taxes, but if you pay attention you will observe that your house will lose value, mansion by mansion.

Looking for Mr. Goodbar

From the Redding Pilot (CT)
Takacs is ready for third term
Jul 26, 2007

Selectman Don Takacs is ready to take on a third term in office. At last week’s Republican caucus, he was selected once again as First Selectman Natalie Ketcham’s running mate.

A 30-year resident, Mr. Takacs describes Redding as “an oasis in Fairfield County” with a pristine environment. And while he believes growth is inevitable, “the key” is to keep that growth in perspective, “to retain the environment we have,” he said.

Mr. Takacs acknowledges this is “a difficult task ... As the area grows, it requires diligence to retain the character of the town which I love,” he said, citing this as a major reason he wants to continue in office.

The town is bigger than when he moved here, Mr. Takacs said, “but the character is the same.” He attributes this to the town’s concept of open space, calling it “awesome.”

...

A sense of history

A sense of history is also important to the town, the selectman said. “Preservation is something the town is supporting.”

He said the character of homes in surrounding towns has been impacted by teardowns, whereby “large, palatial homes have replaced the original Colonial homes.

“The character here has been retained. I’d like to do everything I can to continue that process,” Mr. Takacs said.

...

For Mr. Takacs, it is essential that Redding not be turned into something resembling the larger area towns. “We must meet the needs of all citizens while retaining the character of the town.”

Since he has the time available, Mr. Takacs said, serving on the Board of Selectmen “is an excellent way to give back to the town, which has been such a great place in which to live.” ...

Who is ready to step forward for Raleigh?

Time to Tip?

Leveling restrictions on McMansions
As America's desire for bigger houses grows, communities declare enough. But capping growth can have unintended effects. -- latimes.com

ALLENSPARK, COLO. — Fed up with seeing outsize houses popping up in open spaces or overwhelming the scale of established neighborhoods, cities and counties across the United States are declaring war on McMansions.

• Famously eco-friendly Boulder County, Colo., is considering forcing people in some rural areas to pay extra to build homes bigger than 3,000 square feet.

• Atlantic Beach, Fla., has restricted home size to half the square footage of lots, and the Los Angeles City Council is due to consider a similar measure.

• In Minneapolis, reining in big homes was the top issue Betsy Hodges heard about when door-knocking in her successful campaign for City Council in 2005; last month she and the rest of the council unanimously passed a law restricting home size to half the square footage of each lot.

"There are blocks in my district where almost every house has been rebuilt," Hodges said last week. With homebuilders replacing "smaller houses and building larger homes, people felt they were losing the things they valued about their neighborhood."

McMansions are an issue mostly in built-out cities or in rural communities where residents hope to preserve a bucolic character, experts say. Traditionally, home size has been regulated by zoning laws that require structures to be set back a certain distance from the property line and permit building only within a "footprint." But as land prices rise and the desire for bigger houses grows, new housing is increasingly "bigfooting" lots and consuming airspace, leading to the rush to set limits.

I recommend a read of this article as it offers good information on how places are dealing with issue, the tensions, the forces and the counter forces. Are we reaching a tipping point?

A person can hope.

Habitats for Humans

El Salvador, July 2006


This is a home being built for a family by a church group from Durham. It is a serious upgrade from the former housing, which you can see to the left and behind the house. The house will be two bedrooms, concrete block, dirt floor, with bars on window openings, 700 sq ft.

This house is being built for a woman caring for her older sister; they have been sharing this piece of land and taking shelter in the handmade huts. Their kitchen is outdoors and consists of a platform with hose water and fireplace. The daughter who has a job in the city is paying the mortgage, which is substantial.

The house will resemble this when completed, although in El Salvador this kitchen will be outside and the bathroom connected to the back of the house.


The new owners are very proud. They cooked lunch for the work crews each day. The women dressed each day in flowered cotton dresses and made small gifts for the volunteers to bring back. Real treasures. The joy was palpable.

Habitats in Raleigh . . .

Raleigh, July 2007


2148 Sq Foot house on .48 acre lot demolished to make way 5000 sq ft house. Built 1948, additions 1980. Stone exterior.


In addition to the loss of this house, we also are losing the best Christmas display in the neighborhood. But I digress.


This is my favorite shot.

We are not alone

Westport Teardowns: Creating a Digital Record
Check this tool out

In Westport, Connecticut, the online news, Westport Now, features the teardown of the day. In addition there is a map where you can research the past and future homes that will be demolished to make way for larger homes.

Westport has two problems. One is the very deep history that is preserved in some of the housing stock. Some of these houses go back to the 1700-1800s. Their other problem is that they are a most desirable place to live.

Once again, the conflict arises. The charm that attracts residents is disappearing one property at a time. Because of the incredibly high property values, these homes are being replaced with huge, expensive structures. An area that had several types of housing stock -- estates (think Martha Stewart, Paul Newman), historic, modest, and rural -- has reached a time and place where land values and demand override all the other qualities.

What is going to happen when the next generation looks back and wonders where the green space is, or how 5000 sq ft houses made sense? In the 1980s, the big houses of the early 1900s were being divided into apartments. Now those neighborhoods have been restored to single family homes, with much gratitude that these lovely old buildings were preserved. In Raleigh, Cameron Park, Oakwood and Boylan Heights have all been saved. Now these are the hottest areas for attracting denser residential development on their commercial borders.

As the next neighborhoods down the historical timeline become ground zero for tearing down and rebuilding, these concerns emerge anew. So what is the plan, Raleigh, for preserving Hayes Barton, Bloomsbury, Anderson Heights, and Roanoke Park from the wrecking ball?


From Westport Now:

With the pace of Westport teardowns at a record level, WestportNow decided to feature some of the demolitions that are causing such an upheaval on the real estate scene. We welcome reader contributions to this occasional photo feature, which is intended to create a digital record of some of Westport's history. This house was at ...

Today's WestportNow teardown is at 34 Newtown Turnpike. A demolition permit has been applied for. The Westport Historic District Commission imposed a 60-day delay on demolition at its Feb. 8 meeting. The house, built in the 1760s, is also known as ...

Comments

I very much appreciate your coverage of antique homes being torn down in Westport. I happened to live in that home for 32 years, and other familes for about 170 years before us. I find it sad in general and heartbreaking in specific. ...

A distressing reminder that house by house, bulldozed one at a time, Westport is starting to look like just another late 20th suburban development.

From personal experience, I urge buyers of old homes to live in their house for a year or two before doing any substantial work: make friends with the house, the property, and learn the vernacular of the neighborhood. ...

Thanks for showing these old houses. I read the Historic District Agendas and try to visit the places they consider for demolition permits but sometimes I can't find them or it's too late. The topic of tear-downs is one that is discussed almost every day among my friends, old-timers and new-comers alike. ...

I drove by this partial teardown a week or so ago, and our digital camera was off being fixed so I had no way to take a photo. I had the same reaction: we need to document these wonderful homes (old and new) that gave Westport it's character. ...

Ten years ago you'd drive down a street and there would be an old farmhouse, a small, pristine cape, a modern house set back, a Victorian home from the 1800s, and it was so charming. We are ALL going to lose if there is just stone fence with 4' high wooden fence atop it, hiding any views, for mile after mile in town. We've solved bigger problems: any ideas about what we can do? Lovingly from someone who moved here in 1946 to Roseville Road (originally called Poor Town Road, according to my late-102-year-old neighbor!) ...

Its not that things are changing, its the rate at which things are changing. Westport's real estate is undergoing the natural (and sometimes unfortunate and disconcerting) state of evolution. Whose fault is it? Should the seller pre-qualify the buyer and demand that the buyer only renovate rather than obliterate their home? Do we seek to regulate (ugh!) in an attempt to control this remaking of our residential landscape? Or do we accept this change as the natural progression of our town and our society and try to move on? Kindda reminds me of the Town's struggle with the Long Term School Renovation/Building Program and the many other Town-wide issues surrounding those who advocate for change and those who don't. Yet this one is centered on our individual rights to own and maintain our personal property. ...

I happen to know the person who now owns this house and she has done everything to try to save it. Her engineer and her contractor both said that it was too far gone. She got demolition permission from the Historic Distric Commission as the house had historic designation, and she must rebuild so the the outside of the house looks just like the old one. She even called me before demolition so that I would not think badly of her. (I live in a 1740's farmhouse which she sold me when she was a RE broker) I remember well how excited she was when she bought the house and we talked about how much fun it would be to restore it. This is not a case of disregard for an old house. It is a case of too many people letting it go until it was too late. ...

This Just In

Making McMansion Owners Pay
July 12, 2007 | Time Magazine

As bloated homes and McMansions continue to sprout up across the country, Boulder, Colorado, may have come up with a lucrative approach to contain what detractors call the plague of Garage Mahals and Big-Hair Houses. At a July 10 meeting, where more than 70 citizens spoke, Boulder county commissioners preliminarily approved a system of development rights transfers that would extract mega-bucks from builders of mega-homes. ...

Intriguing idea. So far it looks like the toll for such a Venti house in an unlikely location is paid by the neighbors who lose their views and sunlight, the ground which is covered with impervious surfaces, the streetscape which is now devoid of trees and lawns, the geographic areas which lose their heritage and connections, the neighborhoods who lose their diversity and livability, residents whose property taxes rise commensurately with the "improvements" in their comparable tax zone, and everyone who will pay higher prices for energy and water uses that are affected by the resources larger houses use.

What is unique about the proposal in Colorado is that it offers positive economic incentives for NOT living large, and makes large houses pay for their cost to the surrounding communities by purchasing size "credits" for their homes.

It's a start. So far, those who can afford million dollar homes have been able to shift the burden of exercising their property rights onto their neighbors. Finding a way to reward, rather than punish, the neighbors is intriguing indeed.