*
I am doing a project about the move from diverse neighborhoods to planned, homogenous housing develoments, and I would like input from both a builders perspective and an architects perspective. thank you very much…
Discussion Forum
Discussion Forum
Up Next
Video Shorts
Featured Story
The FHB Podcast crew takes a closer look at an interesting roof.
Highlights
"I have learned so much thanks to the searchable articles on the FHB website. I can confidently say that I expect to be a life-long subscriber." - M.K.
Replies
*
Lindy, As a carpenter I may not be able give the big picture you may be looking for so let me say this, new developments that add to sprawl are one of my biggest gripes. The high end ,gated community is no more a plus to a region than the cracker box communities at the other end of the scale. The market drives a lot of what get's built. No one wants to build a house that won't sell. As long as American's want the suburban dream house with a yard, and space between them and their neighbor that is what will be built. I'm not sure there is a move away from diverse neighborhoods to homogenous developments. We still have both here in SE Virginia, but the land for the divrse neighborhoods seems to be dwindling. What is your perspective? email me if you want, I would value your opinion. Skip
*Here in Phoenix, the building of a single home at a time (full custom) is rare, its mostly tract style housing (300 at a time or more).What I see happening (just my opinion)is the quality suffering badly and the price going up. People moving in from out of state (last rate heard was 200 a day)see a house that is of good value in comparison to where there coming from, but don't take into account the pricing structure of the valley as a whole. Example: I work for a builder who has basicaly four floorplans, yesterday I worked on one that was priced at 600,000 plus...the SAME house no more than ten miles away is priced at 300,000. I know what everyone says, LOCATION,LOCATION,LOCATION, let me tell you, the desert 'aint that much different in ten miles! The sad fact of the matter is, the quality is crap. Fingerjoint studs, wood that should be where its not, skiptrowel drywall to hide crap work, etc. for 600 thou? The houses are being built SO fast, that the ball already in motion cant be stopped. Why does everyone (myself included) do it? I need to eat, and only so many full customs are being built. I try my best (with time allowed)and dont turn out crap work, but can't fight the builders. Just a prediction, but remodelers get ready in this area in about five to ten years, the ammount of fix up work when these heaps fall apart will be staggering!The buy incentives are getting pretty crazy also, with free pools and such no longer doing it. One builder is giving away FULLY LOADED Yucons and Suburbans with purchase, parked right in the garage when you move in!Crazy stuff down here.CSR in AZ
*when i started in '75.... house lots were $10K.. houses cost about $25 K and septic system wre about $2K... every one of those items as increased 10x.. so it's pretty consistent... those are average middle income homes and lots..so roll the clock forward 25 years and start at teh base of $250 K...sounds like $2.5 million dollars for the average home... the subdivisions are teh only thing that can even come close to keeping those costs in line.....and the biggest single cost is ALWAYS the land under the house... and it's cheaper the farther away yuou get from the market area...... the only way i see it getting different is the commnities will start to own the land... and people will rent the land but own the houses...the communities will be planned by planning staff working for the towns...and builders will have to comply with strict subdivision and zonning regulations..it will be this way in every metropolitan area in the US....want a career.?.. go into planning .. it'll be the forefront of everything..
*Mike,interesting.... very interesting.I've got friends out the end of Long Island and their property rights are about what you describe. 50 year leases or something. the only problem is that the woman is old, very old, and is actually getting close to the end of her lease. I would love to know how, and for what price, it will be renewed.Chris R.,How's the building in AZ? My parents moved to Tucson about 6 yrs. ago from PA, guess they are part of the influx problem too, though I must say in their defense, that they have been going out there yearly all their lives. I've often thought of getting my wife to agree to move there, but only if it would be worth the fight she'd put up as a matter of habit. I would have thought the custom market would be better than you alude to.What about higher up? toward Sedona (sp?) ? It always seemed like there was money out in them there hills, plus some pretty progressive people to spend it on big fancy cribs. Would like to know what you think.Lindy,Sprall BAD. Very very BAD. maybe even a little evil too!All the land will be gone soon. The only justice is that due to the pervasive lack of quality in the adverage subdivision, it will be RECLAIMED by the land that much sooner. City neighborhood living is nice but you've got to have your privacy. All homes on a 1/4 ac. or less sould come equiped with a thoughtfuly designed, nicely built, tall, well landscaped, FENCE. Bamboo works gooood.BeWell, PB
*hey phat.. bamboo does work nice and some of the species is non-invasive..the systems i've seen the land is owned by the agency forever... and the houses are owned forever... the houses can be sold.. but the land cannot..so far this is working with non-profit agencies ...there is one here called church communit corp... they are a non-denominational non-profit that adminsiters a lot of housing programs.. low interest remodeling loans .. etc..
*I live in an older "neighborhood". Guess what. In the 30's and 40's it was a "development". I'm not sure what causes it, but I can tell you it takes time for a neighborhood to develope character. Some sooner than others, some not at all. It's amazing what 20-30- yrs. of tree and landscape growth will do for a neighborhood.I've done a lot of remodeling in some of these Levittown style developements, and believe me thank God those days are over(at least around here) By and large what is built today is of a better quality. But today in these developements people are changing the appearance and size of their homes. This activity, over time, helps the overall appearance of a cookie cutter neighborhood.John
*Phat,The building is going crazy here, I'm in Phoenix but other areas are getting just as fast paced. Tucson is still small in comparison and is starting to feel the pressures like Phx and is'nt going to slow anytime soon. Sedona and the northern terratrees are all about custom, and a lot of money. Example: My old boss from Lopers Performance had a house done up there with a 19 (no typo)car attached garage, for all his camaros (all '67-'69 big blocks) and still had to build the shop for the 'vettes and street rods. The house of course was equally as big and impressive, but there is money and a good majority is from out of state which is no problem. Its the crap/tract housing that is catching people unaware (or will be soon) and will be causing the most work for the re-mod crowd. Its trully sad that median housing is right around 110 to 125 (which sounds good coming from someplace like So. Cal, or Bellevue/Kirkland (ask Crazy Legs)and the houses look good from the outside, but are just built out of shit material, with labor that does not care what they build.
*My place is the middle one of three identical buildings that were built in 1926 -- identical except for porch and roof design, which are as different as possible. Originally, they were four unit apartments, but the north building was re-divided long ago into seven, and I'm turning mine into a single family house.It's like the old Volkswagens -- what were originally the most uniform, identical, mass produced cars were turned by their owners into the most individual.-- J.S.
*It's disgusting.Mainly because it's a low bidder, low budget race to see who can pile up the most vinyl. And make the most houses that look the same.I refuse to be a part of it.MD
*Lindy,Here in the Toronto region the best farmland in Canada is getting covered in tract housing. Traffic is a nightmare and environmental issues like rainwater runoff are becoming hot issues. We have an entire generation of people who grew up in inner city houses that now feel they need twice the square footage of their parents to feel like they've made it. They also seem to need big trucks to get to and from their palaces without feeling too small between the legs (if you know what I mean). As long as urban planners, builders and the auto industry pander to these attitudes, there is not much chance anybody will consider the neighborhood values you ask about.I'm glad so many builders who read this are concerned about these issues. Unfortunately these are not the builders in our area. By the way, how many of these developments are you seeing with sidewalks? It looks like people move out to the burbs raise a family but then don't expect their kids to even be able to walk to school. At lease in the 1920's tract houses somebody thought about how people would actually live with their neighbors.
*Lindy;I grew up in the country, and live in the country now. In between, I lived in a good sized city. I lived in two old neighborhoods, where every house was different, there were lots of shops and parks, and a real sense of community. I also lived in two housing developments (although I guess there are a lot of definitions of what a development is). These weren't blocks of tenements or apartments, but supposedly 'planned' communities of suburban houses, with every house very similar, no sidewalks, no shops except for the occasional strip mall, and some parks that few people used. There was nowhere for kids and teenagers to go or anything for them to do, except head for the malls. I hated how it made me feel, and I hated the way it seemed to make kids (and their parents) feel. People didn't even have the basic freedom to paint their houses whatever colour they wanted; they were allowed to choose between two colurs, if I recall.It was temporary for me, and I hope to never live in a place like that again (but it seems to be fine for others). I think for all the rhetoric about the planning that goes into them, they exist to make it convenient for developers to sell houses. The only upside I can think of is the housing is often fairly affordable.
*Sidewalks ? I live in a GTA "tract" house and we have sidewalks. All the new homes have sidewalks.
*I think there might be something to what JRS said about yesterday's "developments" becoming today's "neighborhoods". As homes change hands, or as owner's needs change, they add a dormer here, or convert the garage to living space there, and soon each home takes on it's own character. Never thought about that one.This is pitiful, having to go online to talk with your daughter though, isn't it?
*jimbo... count yur blessings........
*Crazy is right, Chris. I am a dweller in one of those houses, and it's about like living in an apartment, except that apartments have pools and playgrounds. Here it's just square miles of cocoons. And nobody owns their own property, even though they paid full price for it. If the homeowner's association says you can't keep your trashcan beside your house, you can either move it to the back yard or spend a bunch of money fighting them in court. Don't even think of repainting your own house without checking with them first. They get to approve the color. And for this you pay 120 to 180 grand. Let's talk about floorplans. Oh, never mind, it hurts too much to talk about it..
*Hank Hill said it best: "Good fences don't make good neighbors, but high fences help."
*The maid has to live someplace.
*In the part of NY where I live some of the developments have homes with a minimum of 2 acre parcels to keep your neighbors that far away. The last 9 home community I worked on had homes priced from the 10million to 20million dollar range.Lower Fairfield county Conn. is very similiar. It all depends on where you live ,what the average income is,and its location to a major metro area. Of course I had to do alot of traveling to get to these places and the competition to land some of these contracts are fierce. Anyway ,my point is not all developments are slam them up vinyl sided tract homes. Many in this area are stylish,large, well landscapedd homes by closing day. As long as the economy allows it the spec home that gets built in any development around here have to offer many the similar aspects of the custom homes in order to sell.
*Jim, in the developments I was talking about, you wouldn't be permitted to make those changes; everything is regulated down to the paint colours. The architecture to begin with, from what I've seen, is generally uninspired and uncomfortable. And the typical suburban development doesn't age gracefully IMO; todays nice midlevel townhouse s seem to start looking shabby a lot quicker than they should, and you can almost see them decline in every way. People move on to buy a similar new house, in a new development, with more square footage, and on and on Can you tell I'm not a fan?
*Hey Vern,Where do you live? You could'nt be more right about the homeowners associations, about ten or twelve years ago I got tossed from one in Scottsdale due to my love of and owning a racecar. We all could'nt see the love of a big block and four inch exhaust being tuned and readied for Sunday. They would'nt even talk to me by the time I was (asked) to leave.
*One gripe I have is little or no space is planned for the children. Kids need more than one field to play in. And the streets should be wide enough so kids can safely bicycle with traffic that seems to go faster and faster. The sidewalks should be generously wide. I pass a sixty home project that left the steepest hills open and the developer braggs about how he put in a conservation easement. Until two years ago kids played baseball on the level sections and every weekend parents brought their little ones and let them run freely. The development was fiercely fought but as usual the developer won. Some of the homes were completed in three months using building techniques and materials I have used to build sheds and playhouses. And this is somehow benefitting the community?
*Lindy,If you want a developers perspective try this web site "www.therousecompany.com". In the table of contents select "Columbia, Md". The site lists a few stats commmercial and residential, costs of homes, incomes, tax base, names a few builders, etc... Columbia was planned in the 60's and still growing, mall, shopping centers, mixed housing,etc.. just about swallowed up the whole county.Good luck on the project
*Some of you guys are snobs. How many of you remember living in an apartment stacked like sardines with the rest of humanity? How many of you have lived for decades with white walls because you are not allowed to paint them? Suffered through sweltering heat in a heat emergency because repairing the AC is not considered an emergency by landlords? How many of you remember lying in bed at 1 a.m., the alarm set for 5, listening to your neighbors poor choice in music, screaming fights, or other screaming? The dream you have at 1 a.m. is to have a place of your own. No matter how small, how poorly built, how sneered at by people who are in construction, it is still yours. For most of us the choices are few: an inexpensive home in a poorly built subdivision or an inexpensive older home that has more character, is better built and is a fixer-upper. Apartment living doesn't prepare one for the many tasks of caring for an older home, so these people who buy in a subdivision are hoping that they are getting their dream without buying somebody else's problems. There is not enough space in our world for everybody to realize that dream. So what if the yard is a postage stamp - it is bigger than the window box that always had something dying in it at the old apartment. Many things have contributed to the poorer quality construction we see in today's homes, and it is true that those of us desparate for a place of our own have created a market for unscrupulous builders. But please, stop ridiculing people for their ignorance. They didn't set out to buy a crummy home. They set out to buy a home.
*amy.. i agree... levittown had the same detractors.. and those houses now have their third generations living in them...what we fail to realize is that the average couple will pour all their dreams and treasure into these houses.. no matter how poorly built.. they will find a way to keep them and maintain them and sell them to the next young couple....if they were built close in to a metro area... eventually they get yuppified and remodeled into something they never were....in the meantime.. they'll be someone's home...where do you think the bungalows of california came from ?b on the other hand..it seems we're talking about two different animals...the houses these guys seem to be criticizing are not starter homes... they're ""move-up""".. and it is too bad the buyers aren't more sophisticated....and the builders aren't hung ...
*Amy,First off, these threads are not designed or written to "ridicule" the unknowlegeable. Obviously people such as yourself (I'm sure there are many more) sit in the shadows and read some of the things that are said here by the people in the trades. These things should be learned from and not taken so personally, if there are questions..ask. A home is one of the largest purchases a consumer will make, and one that will have a very deep impact on every aspect of ones (or a couples) life. It should be researched to the last stick of wood it takes to build the structure, reguardless of size. THAT is the problem with some of the buying public, they dont give a damn how its done, just make it look good enough to compliment the Lexus, and to hell with what it was built with or how long it will last. Think about the time and research it took to buy the computer your pounding away on now, the components installed to do the job, and how long it would function before repairs or worse yet it was outdated. Most people don't ask that many questions about the house their signing for at a thou and up a month. If all that does'nt matter, if money is no object, than please give me a call...I'll be happy to build you your dream home you've thought about so many nights at 1:00am.Besides, the original question was asked about a builders perspective also....sorry our views hurt your feelings, and I don't understand how that makes us "snobs". That term (among others) is usually reserved for the people we build for,who look at us as second rate blue collar workers. Look at the thread " Hats off " to see more of what I'm trying to say.
*Back in the late 60's, we rented a small home in Alhambra, CA. The neighborhood was a tract devleopment, and the homes were originally built from about 850 to 1200 sq. ft. The neighborhood was absolutely beautiful! Why?Curving streets helped break up the monotomy of similar rooflines and trees shielded the tract architecture, but most important was this: Each home had a single-lane driveway alongside the house, leading to a widened driveway and a detached two-car garage at the rear corner of the lot. Every floor plan featured a back step or porch which led into the home in an area near the kitchen. AND, there was a local ordinance prohibiting overnight street parking.The result was a view of lawns, trees, houses, etc., without vehicles... it's amazing how a bunch of cars clutter things up. Ever see a realtor's photo with a car in the drive? Not likely.The developer also provided a small park area in the center of the community, and configured the streets in such a way to discourage through traffic.BTW, we revisited the neighborhood a few years ago and were happy to see that things hadn't changed.So, Lindy, here's an example of how some simple planning created an attractive neighborhood comprised of very modest homes.One of the reasons many of today's more expensive communities have pleasant apperances is the prohibition of front-load garages... not only can the homes have pleasant front elevations, but the vehicles are shifted to the side or rear of the residence. Unfortuately, when land prices are high and the builder/developer has to use small lot sizes to minimize home purchase prices, front-load garages dominate. As multi-car families fill their garages with junk, the neighborhoods attain all the charm of common strip malls.With a garage full of tools and materials, and three vehicles in my driveway, Steve
*This is a great question for this website. Difficult to answer. Everyone I know either hates 'em or lives in one. There doesn't seem to be an in-between. Housing developements are our free market system on a big scale: all profit driven. They do help solve the short term problem of affordable, or at least cheaper, housing but give minimal planning to the long term impacts, which are huge. Some examples:They seperate housing and commerce, forcing the use of cars and roads. They plow up large tracts land that upset the eco-system. They are generally ineffecient energy users. They divide the community up into little fenced lots with no center, or communal gathering point. In terms of asthetics, they usually have no humanity, no inspiration, and are sometimes frankly horrid to be in. I could go on forever.The alternative is also frightening: Government planning and control of private property.Finding a solution to this dilema is a large reason I got into this business. (However, making a living keeps getting in the way) Something has to change and I hope it will be a graceful transition.
*Hey everyone - Lindy is really excited about all this response and asked me to thank all of you. She had to go away for a few days before she could jump in with more questions, but will when she gets back. In the meantime, thanks again. - Jim
*Well Lindy let me give you a little different perspective. In a very real way people today don't Buy a home they Rent a home with what we call "buying" being just a different way of renting. That is with society being so mobile most people know they aren't going to live in one place in one home for the rest of their lives. Matter of fact the last time I looked the average length of time a family spends in one residence is like six years. So, they make their housing decision based on current purchase price, what they can afford for comfort, social status and expected ability to make money in the end.So, a person who hasn't much money and can't afford better conditions, or who just wants the convenience of no chores will choose to live in a condo/apartment style building. As a matter of fact the conversion of "rental" apartments to "bought" comndos helps illustrate my point.The person who can afford more will "buy" a home in as expensive a neighborhood as they can afford so they can have those amenities. Now since the mortgage holder really has the majority investment the reality is that the "buyer" is really just renting, on different terms, from the mortgage holder. Then when it is time to move they go on to the next place.Houses today are treated by most folks very much like cars. They are "bought and sold", "rented and turned in" with no real difference in function and based on the individual economics. In this way houses and cars are as much social statements as they are shelter. Builders and architects are going to spend their energy creating housing that they can sell to this mobile community.So, housing developments end up being very much like car dealerships that sell finely differentiated products from different manufacturers. Go to the one that suits you and fits your budget. Whether you "buy" or "rent" depends on the individual economics and has very little to do with our traditional thinking. Builders and architects togther are very little different than the car manufacturers as far as function is concerned. This is really obvious when looking at the bigger builders in the US.
*Where I live, the developers/builders control most of the new serviced land (it can take years and years to get a raw lot seviced around here) and the 'spec' builders grab up most of the in-fill lots and a high percentage of the sacrificials (people will buy a 1200 sq ft bungalow on a 50' lot sight unseen and just rip down the old house and put a 3000-5000 sq ft in its place for resale). Occasionally you see someone cleaving off a couple of building lots off their original 10 acre country place or some little glade turned into a raw development of 5 - 10 lots; but these are often very expensive lots (and then there's architects, permits, craftsmen, etc.) So, unless you want (and can afford) something really special, there's almost no incentive to building a custom home in this area.
*phill... what does this mean ?...((So, unless you want (and can afford) something really special, there's almost no incentive to building a custom home in this area. ))there's no incentive to building custom in this area ?there's no incentive to building ?the lots are too expensive ?the builders / developers own all the land so you have to take what they build ?what ?
*These communities do indeed have places for children. They are called malls. This way you get to drive them there private industry can teach your kids how to be good consumers (or good shoplifters). Who wants them playing outside when there is merchandise to move?
*Some of all of the above Mike.Unless you're building a very high-end home (both by construction and by location), you'll never come close to getting your investment out of it.Single building lots are very hard to find unless you buy out and demolish an existing house; getting permission to demolish and rebuild better in any neighbourhood that went through the planning process in the last 30 or so years would be very hard, so it's all older neighbourhoods. In some parts of Toronto you could pay $300K for a 1000 sq ft semi on a 25'x 75' lot that was built before the war and has never been impproved since. Where my "aunt" lives, I think the neighbourhood is called Lawrence Park (?), a 1500 sq ft split level on a 40' by 80' lot went for $650K to be demolished. You can't economically build 2000 sq ft family homes in this environment. Out in the near sticks (i.e. just out side the borders of the city); the land developers have had options on virtually all of the land for over 20 years. They made big down-payments on huge tracts of land and will almost never sell a single lot. Then they build their own homes: 150 houses through 12 sets of plans done by their in-house architect; built cheaply with bulk buying and massive workforces
*..not to mention your WIFE!!And Lindy...I've just gone upstairs to check on your room...it looks like a bomb went off! We aren't ready for urban sprawl just yet young lady.
*Pragmatism dictates that these developments are still the way of the past and the future. Land slowly disappears, so homes get closer together. People have different tastes and tend to gravitate towards homes/subdivisions where others share their tastes. Subdivision intenders usually don't want the most expensive or distinct home in the neighborhood, homes get more similar. We homogenize ourselves. Builders and developers follow suit, and tend to do it as cheaply as possible, commensurate with the home buyer's education in home construction.I gravitate towards these subdivisions, too, I must say. The subdivision I currently live in and build in is unusual for the metro-Atlanta area in that it stipulates all-brick exteriors, 10:12 minimum roof pitch, front porch, sidewalks on both sides of the streets, nice landscaping on all sides, in-ground sprinkler systems... all on 1/4 acre lots where most homes have rear garages served by alleys. This neighborhood will have lasting value, but guess what? People balk at the low-$200K prices and instead pay the same for brick-front, vinyl-sided houses with cheaper everything. Why? They're bigger. I'll stick with where I am, but can you blame most builders and developers for responding to what the average buyer wants (or thinks he/she wants?)Did I make any sense?
*Mike, do you mean hanged?Ron
*ron.....maybe.......depends on the context... don't it ?
*Lindy,I just want to suggest you read "The Death and Life of Great American Cities" by Jane Jacobs. It seems to be quite relevant to your essay. Also, there was a little ditty by Malvina Reynold's about all those houses made of "ticky-tacky, all in a row." Something like that.- Peter
*Mike, Some of us builders like to think we are, and you're not going to contradict me, are you?Ron
*nope....and i shore hope lindy don't mind us takin this little tangent....harrrumph.. can we get back to the serious purpose of this heah thread ?
*The "bottom line" as they say is that today houses are more like cars than anything else. People will buy what they can afford. Developments are the Ford, Chevy, Buick etc of the housing world. Most people know buying a house isn't a forever thing and don't look at it as "the biggest purchase they'll make in their lives". And they are correct. They'll just live there for a few years until some reason makes them move. Just like owning a car for a few years until it is time to sell and move on.
*Don't you see this as a (troubling) departure from our parents, though? My mom & dad bought the house in 1965?. There's been quite a few changes since then (4-5 more kids, dad died, most of the kids are grown and out of the house) and yet mom's still there. It's kinda weird, we weren't the only ones like that in the neighborhood. Now, everyone picks up and moves every 3-5-7 years, and acts like it's no big deal. No wonder people complain about the lack of communities, nobody allows them time to set up. (I just thought of something - communities are like Jell-O. You don't get to enjoy it right after you're done, it takes time to properly form.)
*Of course. Sorry. Ron
*Hi Lindy:I'm just north of you (N of Bothell, S of Mill Creek) and we live in a mid-30's brick tudor. Trust me, it's the only one up here... Developments are springing up all around us. The houses are generally bland, the lots are painfully small (relative to the house footprint), they pump vehicles out onto our street in an unending stream, and I've yet to meet anyone from there face to face. It's like living next door to the 'Mole People.' The houses are fairly expensive (200 - 300K for houses ~2-3 miles from the nearest grocery store).We have a carport on the side of the house that very efficiently provides us with all the cover our two vehicles need. I agree that if I lived in the midwest, I would swear at the bitter cold when I got up in the morning - but just how much energy should people be wasting heating their 'resting' vehicles anyways? As long as you keep the elements off the top of the car, you're pretty much offering it effective protection.Because of this, the house is generally all living space, depending on how you view basements.My point is this: I submit that b the fact that the house design does not incorporate a garage is the major contributor to it's aesthetically pleasing appearance. (I give second place to the lack of trusses...) I'm sorry I don't have a picture to post - I've yet to meet anyone that wasn't charmed by it's appearance. It seems that our marriage to vehicles has led us to hole up in little enclaves (ironically enough, most people like cul-de-sacs because of traffic concerns...), in gargantuan houses designed to hold increasingly large vehicles (ostensibly to improve 'survivability' in the potential car wrecks our driving intensive lifestyles expose us to), while sacrificing the beauty of our homes and the quality of our environment. This is a great topic for study, so be sure to let us know what kind of conclusions, if any, you arrive at. You should consider wandering around downtown Bothell to get a sense of a 'diverse neighborhood', and then push on up to Mill Creek to see an expensive version of the other option. Feel free to drop me a line if you want to stop by our place... Tell the old man he has to be nice, and not make too much fun of the previous owners 'remodelings'... Maybe he can derive some amusement from the gratuitous use of unpeeled ceder poles in the shop building...-t
*I visited the Sun City Huntley development in Illinois recently. The housing design is intended to remind retiring seniors of the typical midwest housing that they are leaving, and from a head-on view they are not bad: Small Porches; bumpouts on the roof that make it look like two-story houses (they are mostly one-story, for senior citizen use) ..... you get the idea.BUT.................They are almost all a uniform vinyl siding in the wierdest green-gray color. And all of them have attached garages that stand forward of the house, so when you look down the street, all you see is a line of garages. The houses are hidden in the recess.I told my wife how dreary it was. She replied, quite sensibly, "It's not designed to sell to you; it is intended to be comforting to the people that grew up in the postwar ranch houses with the big garage in the front."I suppose so. But, gawd almighty, it is painful to see.
*This is kind of bitting the hand that feeds me, but here goes. every day I see these townhouse projects spring up with a hundred or more units packed into as small a space as is possible. They used to sell for $90,000 now they are up to $160,000 and still as cheaply made as possible. 80 sq. ft. of front lawn and a two car driveway. then 80 more lawn and another driveway. I call them the future getto's. Imagine what they will look like when they are occupied by renters, maybe wellfare renters. Cracked and missing plastic siding, spray painted with grafetti or gang signs. Breaking and entering will have a whole new meaning. How much security do you really have with plastic siding over builtright? A sharp knife and the siding is history, A punch and the builtright is gone too. Then rip out the insulation and kick in the sheetrock. Maybe now while that's all the working stiff can afford they will be O.K. Once those who work to buy them have gone and it's just a bunch renters we have a new getto.
*thank you, everyone, for being so helpful- I can't tell you how much your input is helping me in my research project- I've printed all the posts so I can look through them and use the other materials you've suggested. ill also try and get back to people who've given me specific advice- thank you again.my next question is: how does a house acquire character? is it in the original design, or its location, or does it happen over time, or does it occur when its remodeled and becomes personalized? id' guess it can be any of these things, or all of them, or some combination, but what do you think? is there any way developments could be built in a way to preserve the beauty of architecture and originality?give me some more, folks!!!and mom- my room isn't messy!!!
*Lindy, Character is the special things that we do not because we have to but because we want to. If one home has a special look, it's because someone (owner,builder, or architect) wants it more then he wants the money that it costs. You can't justify it on any practical basis, rather just a purely emotional, gut feeling. ( the funny thing is that people are so starved for things unique and full of character that the house with character can often command a premium).
*Equate character with custom, plain and simple. As Frenchy said, you look at it on an emotional basis, not on a calculator tape. A home (singular) may have some form of distinction looked at as character, but many homes (plural), as in a development or tract type situation, that look exactly like the aformentioned home, lose that distinction and become just another house. Drive down the street of your average development and see if anything really catches your eye, chances are nothing will. It's not like the old days of telling someone you live in the blue house on Rosemary Lane, and there only being one, mabey two blue houses. Now, Rosemary Lane is all blue, and chances are other than an elevation change here or there, the houses are of mabey three or possibly four types, all mirror image of one another. Just as a side note, It would be interesting to get a developer to acually get into this discussion, and see his/her viewpoint.
*Regarding a house over time...You might findi How Buildings Learnby Stewart Brand interesting to look at. Although it is notb onlyabout homes, it does discuss them. An excellent book I had difficulty putting down.Rich Beckman
*Lindy,Since you live in Pierce County, drive on over to Dupont and look at some of the homes in Northwest Landing. Some of those neighborhoods have a certain curb appeal simply because there are no garages out front as the predominate architectural feature. These houses have alleys and garages out back. By simply adding a small porch with maybe battered columns the designer has added a little charm reminiscent of alder neighborhoods. I am not sure if any of the residents even know the family's name next door, which to me would seem to be part of the charm of a community. As far as character goes, if every house had a certain curb appeal or charm that was not repeated over and over again in the same development, then wouldn't that be a more desirable neighborhood to live in?
*I live in an upscale development where we're lucky enough that the region required a diversity of models, brick colours, etc. and wouldn't give permits for two houses with the same design built side-by-side. That helps enormously. Next, at this price-point, most home-owners seem to seek to add character and individualization to their homes - this starts with trim colours and landscaping. Lots of rocks, trees, shrubs, some flowers, some lighting, virtually all the driveways are brick, but there are lots of different patterns, textures, and colours, and adding unique lites to their front doors can completely alter your impression of a house (I took out the double-opening 32" doors and put in a 36" and two side-lites, all with cut crystal glass).
*So you're saying that the builder or developer can add character through diversity of design and special touches, but its not economically practical? I guess it all comes down to money, which is sad when its about homes- something a family will come home to every day and look at year after year. If a family or person wants to give character- the cost is on them, instead of the developer. I guess that makes sense, but its sort of sad.
*Frank- a while ago you posted a message saying that the developers are just following the preferences of the buyers, and i find that very interesting... because i would like to think that people would want an interesting, slightly different house, but i can see what you are saying. if people werent buying into these homogenous developments, they would stop building them. so what do you think the difference is in people now; why do so many buyers want a house just like everyone else?
*If I may just tweek your last thought there Lindy; it's not a case of costing the consumer or the developer, the consumer pays for it all no matter what. But, with today's prices, many people have to spread out their costs, this may include adding features over time instead of up-front at purchase time.
*Humans acquire character by living, buildings by being lived in. All of the pseudo historical crap being built to arrive at 'character' just amounts to pseudo historical blandness. I have seen great 'bland' modernist architecture take on character with time. As many have repeated in this post, most good neighbourhoods were cheap tract housing at one point (maybe 50 years ago).So how do you arrive at character if it can't be pasted on with mouldings and details? Simple, make the homes liveable. Good design will encourage people to really live in their homes. Good urban planning encourages people to take advantage of neighbourhood amenities. Well planned homes leave room for future expansion, remodelling or repurposing. Who knows, maybe a well designed home will encourage a family to stay in their home for more than a few years rather than get sick of or outgrow it. We can't fix the overall mobility of labour that is ripping up our communities. But at this point it is hard for people to care. They can move to anywhere in North America and find a housing development that looks like the one they just left. They can hide in their cars and never need to make friends with their neighbours and they have got a long distance plan to keep some contact with their family.Living adds dimension to people and it does to architecture too. Think of well developed characters in stories. They have good sides and dark sides. they have surprises and secrets. There is a push out there to build nice squeaky clean walled communities (Celebration USA). To paraphrase somebody else here, 'the ghettos of the future'. No dimension, no character. A great recipe for a pseudo historical ghetto. Living is a bit messy. We all want some safety and security, but if we also want some character we need to get out of the corporate programmed communities to live our own lives.All developments are to some degree planned communities. This is a necessary evil of starting from scratch. The ones I have seen that have developed the most character the quickest appear to be the ones that have left some room for chaos. They tend to be mixed use, mixed income and multiracial. In short, multidimensional. The ones that drag on to boring oblivion are the ones built by (or for) control freaks. The retirement community mentioned in another post is like that. This may be a comforting and even safe place for retirees, but I guess we also expect them to stop living when they go there. I am remodelling my first house to raise my family in. At this point I have every reason to want to stay in it and live for the rest of my life. I may be unique, but deep down inside, I think a lot of people would like that kind of comfort.
*Lindy:There are as many factors involved in housing as their are people. You have seen my posts that shoot at the idea that people buy houses "forever". I would like to add a couple thoughts that have been hinted at.First, today's north american people like percieved comfort and safety more than anything else. That is why when you go to other places where do you see the NA's eating, McDonalds of course. Used to be when a person traveled from one area of the continent to the other they enjoyed finding and enjoying regional differences. Now, with a few exceptions the only regional differences are those maintained as a show for the tourists. The same is true in housing. People are more willing to conform than they are to look inside themselves and find the things that makes each one unique. They want a sense of the familiar and comfortable.Add to this the economics of large scale industrial house production and you get current housing. Even the little guy has to conform to this or go bankrupt. There are just enough people who don't fit the mold and builders who have made a business of catering to them to maintain unique houses.Now, none of this is new. Look at the row houses of the 19th Century. Look at the houses in current and historical Europe. How about the housing in China over the ages? Contrary to what most people think the idea of custom homes that are unique to individuals and reflect their own personalities has been observed more in the breach than the performance.Hope this gives you some food for thought in your research paper. By the way? What is this project being done for?
*i'm writing an essay for a scholarship- its topic is "homes in thurston and mason counties: from the frontier to the future." within this topic, i can choose almost anything to write about. i've always detested housing developments, so i thought i'd do some research on my dads favorite toy and see what you guys thought. i'm really enjoying this discussion. and by the way- dad sort of fibbed on the "crazy legs" part- we like to call him "M-head"dont tell him i told you though, or a big ruckus could begin at the blodgett household
*Well your dad just took a big jump up in my estimation. I figured anyone who hid his identity behind a name like "crazy legs" had to be at least one fry short of a full order. But, to have a high schooler who mostly uses good grammar and usually spells correctly and, most unusual yet, is willing to think outside the box brings credit to him. Or, maybe its' your mom? Yes, that has to be it, your mom.
*Lindy,The character of a "diverse neighborhood" adds so much to the general quality of life there. There's a third alternative though. Instead of a "planned, homogenous housing develoment" I've lived in several planned, DIVERSE develoments. Mill Creek was one such place 20 years ago, where every house HAD to be a different style from the one next store. This was planned. (Now however, all newer developments in Mill Creek are alike, and painted a color I call "real-estate agent beige".) I built in a development in Arlington where the "planning" was some simple CCR's so someone wouldn't put in a mobile and raise pit bulls. The resulting homes where were a diverse scattering of quality custom homes ranging from farmhouse style to European cottages. Where I'm building now in Monroe, its the same, loose planning. Neighbors all seem to know each other and it's a delight to take a walk and view the architecture. Darrell
*M-head? C'mon, Lindy, don't leave it at that. What's the story on "M-head"??? We won't tell jim where we found out!Man, that guy has a heap of nicknames!Rich Beckman
*see, the thing is, his hair is receeding slightly, but only on the sides, so draw yourself a little mental picture and you'll find a letter M on my old man's head. its pretty classic. but my dad would have a conniption if he knew i was disclosing the big family secret, so if he asks, tell him i said hes fabulous and he always wins at horse...so as i've been reading through the messages, i've noticed a few common topics covered; homogenous developments exist because consumers buy them, character is gained over time as the house is lived in and added to, and diverse developments still exist for the people who desire originality in their homes...i'm going to try and structure my essay around these three topics, and i hope its ok with you all if i quote you- you guys are the biggest help.
*Isn't it past your bedtime? I knew this was gonna turn out bad. Man. My own kid, bustin' my chops at Breaktime.
*Lindy, try not to prejudge the outcome of your essay before you do all of your research. Try to keep an unbiased open mind as you listen to the comments from everyone here and in your own research. Keep in mind most of the guys/gals here are far more knowledgeable in housing than the average buyer.True, most new housing developments are ugly because they are built on open land with no trees. Result, acres of roof lines. Image the outcry if you built the same development in a forest.Character in a neighbourhood comes from the things that people add as they live there. Landscaping is one thing, look at a 10, 20 & 30 year old neighbourhood and the areas with more appeal have mature trees and are nicely landscaped.Character also comes from what people add to the houses, a small addition, add a different entrance feature, windows, etc. to personalize their home.True, most people don't live in their house for long. We bought what we could afford when we got married, then bought a larger house 4 doors down the street, 10 years later, when we had kids and could afford bigger. We look at our old house and still like the "curb appeal / character" because of the touches we added. We like the area because of the people, kids , schools etc. (small town, pop. 8,000) Our kids can ride their bike to their friends and not have to be driven, or can play outside without us having to constantly watch them. Coming from a construction education / background, I would have rather custom built but could not afford that. We picked from a dozen plans and could make minor changes. The builder at least had interesting roof lines and layouts. These days builders are adding even more design to the elevations and not just square boxes. (We live about an hour NW of Toronto, Ontario) Most people now will buy houses based on resale because of changes in jobs etc. and need to relocate. Builders are only willing to risk small changes to design etc. as the houses may not sell if the buyers think that it will not resell easily if and when they need to.
*Don't worry, Lindy. He's the proud Papa!Rich Beckman
*Regarding character. As people live in a given house for shorter and shorter periods, they are more likely to make smaller and smaller changes and less likely to pay for quality that lasts. Also, as houses get built new with increasingly more interesting rooflines and other features that mimic an older house that has been added on to, it becomes more complicated (and hence more expensive) to actually add on.Landscaping will become more and more important.Rich Beckman
*Quite correct Rich. Another problem is that with lots getting smaller, you can't put an addition onto a house without violating lot-coverage or set-back codes. Sometime you can get a variance, but it's becomming more and more common for some crank in the neighbourhood to fight it when you go to council.
*
I am doing a project about the move from diverse neighborhoods to planned, homogenous housing develoments, and I would like input from both a builders perspective and an architects perspective. thank you very much...