Took the family to see a new const sub division today. I first saw them last week and they caught my eye because the whole complex is “neotraditional”. 45 farm looking houses all in a row.
I couldnt wait to get in and see them, I was totally excited.
I got inside and couldnt believe what we saw. Fit and finish was about as expected…ok (although I did like the $80 chrome shower fixture and the nickel $100 sink faucets in the same bathroom). The front door handle didnt work without a fight and the master shower door wouldnt open without lifting it and this was the model. Lots of settling, tile grout giving up in the corners, trim caulk pulling from the walls, and painted OSB shelves fitted poorly in the linen closets. The main thing though was the wasted space.
I’m talking about 2200-2600 (275-300 grand) sqft houses that just didnt make alot of sense. One house had a small master suite off of a kitchen not much bigger than mine(I live in a 1300 sqft house).
Three upstairs bedrooms with large closets (good thing) but one bathroom that was too big. Why not lose a foot off of the closets and make 2 bathrooms, or just have larger bedrooms?
Judging from what I saw today I either need to do sloppier work or ask alot more for my flip.
Is this the same everywhere on new const? This model I saw was going for over $300000.
Edited 12/11/2005 8:27 pm ET by MSA1
Edited 12/11/2005 8:29 pm ET by MSA1
Replies
Yeah, it's pretty much the same everywhere. A good friend of mine bought a 5,000 SF "semi-custom" home in Atlanta last year. I went to look at it during framing, and it's was about the sloppiest framing job I'd ever seen. The re-work crew was in there hacking up all the screwups that the main framing crew had made (wrong window RO's, windows not symmetrical around the fireplace, doors set too close to corners for trim, etc). Their work looked as bad as the first crew's.
I wend back last February to see the house a few weeks from completion. We also walked thru a few houses that were supposedly "ready to close". I could have made a 3-page punchlist just in the entry foyer. The houses had tons of upgraded trim and other features that I guess are meant to take your eyes away from how crapily it's all put together- that didn't work on me.
I couldn't stomach the fact that he was spending almost $1 million on this turd, but it's his money- not mine.....
Bob
I think when you drive into one of those "theme" subdivisions there trying to sell the look from the road more then they are the interior!
There is a small(well not really that small anymore) town between San Marcos(where I live) and Austin TX. The area is growing fast, must be a couple thousand homes built there in the last few years. A lot of areas have a Victorian or craftsman style going on. From the street the neighborhoods look kinda cool.
Get inside some of the models and just as you described, shoddy work, half azzed floor plans, and to top it off, $250 - $300G!!!
Doug
What, Dripping Springs? Or Wimberley, or, heaven help us, Driftwood?
Way too many "country themed" developments in around there on my last trip 7-8 months ago. One too many "medium" builders aping the "big" builders, too.Occupational hazard of my occupation not being around (sorry Bubba)
Capn
What, Dripping Springs? Or Wimberley, or, heaven help us, Driftwood?
Although those places are close the area that I'm refering to is Kyle. Man that little burb has grown 10-20 fold since I got here!
Doug
I'm refering to is Kyle. Man that little burb has grown
Not sure poor Kyle is the better for it, either.Occupational hazard of my occupation not being around (sorry Bubba)
Letting quality slide is the wrong response to pressures. It's expensive anyway - so what's another few hours getting these details up to A++?
You all would no doubt become physically ill at what is selling for $700,000 + in the Baltimore Washington market.
Bottom line is no mater where they build a sub par house there is a certain pool of customers that buy based soley on the monthly payment. Slimey car salesmen have been doing it for years and home builders have figured it out too.
I just couldnt believe some of the finish pieces. The OSB linen shelves, i'm currently working on a house in Ferndale MI that I anticipate getting about $140000 for and I wouldnt dream of using OSB for shelves.
Msa1, were you in a Neuman sub?
blue
I dont think so. I really cant remember the builders name, I know I havent heard of him before.
It's the "Golden Park Estates" on 22 & Schoenherr over in Shelby Township.
I find it extremely distressing to consider that so much of our national economy is based on this "housing industry."It's a waste. A waste of open land. A waste of the tax dollars that subsidize it. A drain on infrastructures. A waste of materials. A waste of effort.It just kills me to think of all the wonderful granite, marble, and board feet of perfectly good wood that gets wasted just for the kitchens in these tacky, glitzy pits--most of which will probably end up in a landfill in a few short years when someone is compelled by some lame HGTV program to gut and remodel.
I'm thinking along the same lines, many of these new homes you see are just cookie cutter designs. Something "Tuffy" said about the waste, I have thought about that same thing you see beautiful slabs of natural stone counters sitting on top of cheap Home Depot cabinets. Cabinets that will wear out in less than five years, I can just see some guy at the landfill years from know picking out scrapes of granite to build end tables.
Seems like everyone is so focussed on work anymore that a house is just a place to sleep and eat in between commuting to work and driving the kids hither and yon so they can "play".
So true people buy differently than say in the 40's, 50's and 60's a house was a major purchase but also a great source of pride for many. Still true today but people can buy several homes in one's lifetime today were in the 50's you might be luckey to get one.
I know here many people buy knowing that their job will change in 2 - 5 years and they will sell to move out of town.
At least build homes with some character built in niches, nice trim detail, state of the art lighting systems ect. This won't cut it because it costs too much and takes to long and the profit is less. Builders want to get in slam up as many as possible for as little as possible then move on.
It will only change when buyers demand different.
Jeff
most of which will probably end up in a landfill in a few short years when someone is compelled by some lame HGTV program to gut and remodel
Well, the marble or other stone might not, the quality will likely still have some value to someone (may come down to the sensibilities of who ever does the demo work).
Now, I'll differ with you that a DIY program will compel the demolition of too many of these houses. My contention is that none are built except to suit only their present configuration; that there's no 'extra' in the structure to "keep" or add on to.
Want to "fly" a second floor on a single story? Nope, can't do it--the stick-built attic structure is an integral part of the framing (that's assuming there was some foundation to spring from in the first place). Want to add a bump out? Sure, no prob', except the framing runs the wrong way. Oh, and it's cantilevered into the rest of the structure where it's not load bearing carrying a hangin valley and a hanging ridge . . . Occupational hazard of my occupation not being around (sorry Bubba)
It just kills me to think of all the wonderful granite, marble, and board feet of perfectly good wood that gets wasted just for the kitchens in these tacky, glitzy pits
Stop killing yourself over this tuffy. All the "resources" start out in the earth and then they are returned to the earth. The life cycle continues!
I find it amusing that you worry about the loss of "open" land. Here in Michigan the "open" land is unused farms and the subs that go into them landscape them and cover them with a lot more trees, shrubs, etc. My partner lives out there in the "open" farmland and I find it quite boring and a huge waste of space. If I were king, I'd make everyone of them stop mowing and order them all to plant nice new trees like they all do in suburbia!
Land isn't getting "used' up. It's getting lived on. Would you prefer that everyone live in high rise apartments in big cities?
blue
>>Land isn't getting "used' up. It's getting lived on.Yeah. Sure. Get back to me in a couple more decades when America is practically one continuous suburb from one end to the other. Or when the lobbyists have gotten themselves the rights to begin "developing" our national parks or some such crap.
Or when you can walk from "sea to shining sea" on the tops of illegal aliens.
You guys have listened to too many liberal agendas starting in public school.
There is far more "open" land than we'll ever dream about using in a couple of decades. By the time the open land is threatened to the point of too much urban spread, we'll be able to produce all our essential food needs in a potted plant in the back yard.
They thought it was impossible to walk on the moon. In the near future, we'll be mining it.
blue
>>By the time the open land is threatened to the point of too much urban spread, we'll be able to produce all our essential food needs in a potted plant in the back yard.Even if that were a possible outcome, who would want it? Wouldn't it be better to manage our resources responsiby and preserve as much as we can of this magnificent continent?>>You guys have listened to too many liberal agendas...You know, upon reading your first post I had a thought or two regarding "typical conservative agendas" and the use of natural resources, but I though that would be far too impolite to post. Save it for the tavern.Why the extremism? This isn't a dichotomy--suburbs vs. skyscrapers. This is about using the resources we have to build responsibly and sustainably--creating something of integrity and longlasting usefulness.I have lived my whole life in the midwest, and I have witnessed every city around me being rapidly swallowed by thousands of acres of ticky-tacky housing developments. Not neighborhoods. Not communities. Developments. When you drive through the outskirts of any of these cities, the only way you can tell you've exited one stretch of development and entered another is that the McDonalds and Burger Kings start repeating themselves like the backgrounds in a Flintstones cartoon. We spent the first part of the 20th century making America's cities into great and noble places, and the latter half of the century turning them into total crap.
Edited 12/16/2005 5:18 am ET by tuffy
I have lived my whole life in the midwest, and I have witnessed every city around me being rapidly swallowed by thousands of acres of ticky-tacky housing developments. Not neighborhoods. Not communities. Developments. When you drive through the outskirts of any of these cities, the only way you can tell you've exited one stretch of development and entered another is that the McDonalds and Burger Kings start repeating themselves like the backgrounds in a Flintstones cartoon.
We spent the first part of the 20th century making America's cities into great and noble places, and the latter half of the century turning them into total crap.
Well said! I especially liked the "...like the backgrounds in a Flintstones cartoon." If you don't write professionally, maybe you should! I hear Taunton wants some people to write articles for Fine Hombuilding magazine. ;-)
I went out to our mall yesterday--they've clear cut another wooded area to put up some more stores that we don't need. Then there's an article in the local paper where the city is asking for citizen input on what to do about the horrendous traffic snarls out that way. And silly me, I thought that was why the city hired traffic engineers and planners.
I especially liked the "...like the backgrounds in a Flintstones cartoon."
That was good, wasn't it?
I briefly (26 months, as wil many other places one after the other) lived in Glen Ellen, IL. Folks built a house in a new subdivision on an old dairy farm sprawled onthe GE/Wheaton line. The SubD proudly prefixed all the addresses "23W" for being 23 miles west of downtown Chicago. The new subdiv was 3-3.5 miles down a two-lane asphalt road that came out right at the McDonalds there on the GE/Wheaton line.
That was 1968.
In 1991, having a "flintstones background" moment (wasn't driving) riding around the Chicagoland metro area, I realised I had just ridden down the old farm road into Wheaton. About that time, the complete lack of any visual identity pretty much swamped any sort of "place identification" I could have had. Oh well.Occupational hazard of my occupation not being around (sorry Bubba)
I saw a Russian animated short film once where a guy trudges home past a dozen or so look alike apartment complexes and goes into his apartment and finds his wife with another man and shoots him--then he finds out it's not his wife and not his apartment. He says "Excuse me" and that's how it ends. Maybe it loses something in the translation. Own skazal, "Eezveneetia..." yeah, much better!
ROAR!Occupational hazard of my occupation not being around (sorry Bubba)
I don't think it loses anything in the translation. I have often wondered how some folks up in the DC metro find the right house on a foggy night or after a beer or 10.
Hey Capn -- I grew up in Naperville, and had a similar moment a few years ago driving down what was formerly Barkdoll Rd. (my old street), now Naper Blvd. Our house and the next door neighbor's (1/2-acre each), and for that matter a house a few lots down the road (3 acres), were still there, but they were extremely hard to find amid the back-to-back subdivisions. When I lived there in the 60's there were a total of 6 trick-or-treatable houses within 3/4 of a mile one direction and 1/2 mile the other, cornfields almost everywhere else, and a farm with cows across the street. We moved into town when the farm across the street was sold for the first of what was to be many subdivisions, "Farmstead". No farms anywhere around any more.
cornfields almost everywhere else,
Ah, yes, cornfields. Not field corn, either. Would scare the city kids that I'd go wander into the fields for fun. Wasn't that far by Texas dimensions, and I had no small amount of experience with fields & farming from Indiana.
Yep, do not miss playing street hockey in the cul-de-sac in front of the house (plow left an angled bank that was not pleasant to be checked into <g>).Occupational hazard of my occupation not being around (sorry Bubba)
Re: "We spent the first part of the 20th century making America's cities into great and noble places"...One aspect seldom looked at is that cities are inherently more efficient in terms of delivery of basic and municipal services than a suburban area housing a like number of people. In some ways it is simply a matter of the distances involved. Power, sewer and water lines are all shorter. Police and firemen can spend less time getting there and more time working. Many people living in the sticks don't understand that firemen and police are often forty, or more, minutes away assuming they get a call and drive wide open. And with both adults working the isolated houses are easy targets for crime. Which goes a long way to explain the massive increases in rural crime, drugs, gangs, home invasion and burglary. Criminals are moving to areas with fewer and less prepared police.There are some really good reasons cities were created. Mutual protection, economic synergy, ease of communications and short transport distances all add up. Cities are not without problems. The doughnut hole effect is an international trend. Part of this has to do, IMHO, with the dominance of the big box stores. These stores are set up to work effectively only in suburban areas. There burgeoning footprint and massive parking lots don't translate well in the high land value and more compressed city systems.Contrary to BED's claims of plenty of open land, bounded by the long-term horizon of 'a couple of decades' and mining of the moon, never mind that we were last on the moon in 1972, simple fact is that long-term we are rapidly running out of space. We no longer have any frontier left. Every square inch of land has been claimed and will be bitterly defended. Often what presently looks open is just miles of tract housing waiting to happen. We would do well to look to more populous nations, western Europe and Japan in particular, to learn how to create a livable high-density city, nation and society. Incidentally Japan, last I checked, still has a both more people per square mile and, seemingly in contradiction, the highest percentage of land set aside as parks, national forest and heritage sites of any nation.
Contrary to BED's claims of plenty of open land, bounded by the long-term horizon of 'a couple of decades' and mining of the moon, never mind that we were last on the moon in 1972, simple fact is that long-term we are rapidly running out of space. We no longer have any frontier left. Every square inch of land has been claimed and will be bitterly defended. Often what presently looks open is just miles of tract housing waiting to happen.
Out where I live, there is a lot of space. I agree that east of the Mississippi there is not a lot of open space left, but out west, there is still a lot of open space. The limitation is water. The other limitation is that much of the land is controlled by the BLM. Nevada is a good example; the federal government controls over 85% of the land in that state. Inyo County in California is another example, the federal government and Los Angeles Department of Water and Power own over 90% of the land. There is easily enough flat land to hold the entire US population if you could figure out how to get water to them.
> They thought it was impossible to walk on the moon. In the near future, we'll be mining it.
I kinda doubt that. The von Braun era technology that got us there and back has pretty much been forgotten, and would have to be re-created from scratch. The way education is these days, that may have been a high water mark that'll never be reached again.
And if it did happen, it wouldn't be until long after there was a Lunar Protection Agency to stand in the way. ;-)
-- J.S.
I know which sub that is MSA1. We framed one of those for him several years ago. I didn't personally work on that house because the pay was much too low for my tastes. I think Frank did it to "keep the guys working" in the middle of a winter. We actually got a lot more than he normally was paying but after we were done it was apparent that we'd need a lot more and we wouldn't be doing them anytime soon for what he had budgeted. I'm sure that mentality extends to every trade, which is quite normal for that part of metro detroit. I call it the snakepit. You gotta cut corners to survive.
Bascially, I decided more than five years ago that no one anywhere in the Metro Detroit area was paying anything close to what is needed for "neo-traditional" houses. There is far too much detail work on the exterior and the builders all think that it should be basically priced out the same.
That same thought process applies to split levels and ranches aren't far behind. The only houses that make financial sense for a framer is two story boxes that contain over 2500 sf.
I think that particular builder's name is Paul, if I remember correctly. He's a former carpenter who decided to enter the builders market. He wanted a "good job" but I don't remember if he even bothered to check out the house we were framing in the next sub.
blue
New houses are commodities, quality has no bearing on the price.
DCS Inc.
"Whaddya mean I hurt your feelings, I didn't know you had any feelings." Dave Mustaine
houses are commodities, quality has no bearing on the price.
So sad that is so true, not matter how much I wish it were not so.Occupational hazard of my occupation not being around (sorry Bubba)
Here is the thing. 80% of homebuyers today are office workers, etc who wouldn't know quality in materials and workmanship if they were leaning against it. As I think you said, for many, the only thing they are looking for is a "cutisie house with as much square footage as they can get". As builders/carpenters/etc, we just have to rely on our own integrity to do the right thing and consider the 20% as our target customers.
As far as space planning, if it were any kind of a large builder I would think that would be very well thought out. Here is just a few ideas I'm gonna throw out:
Small kitchens: maybe the thought is that people don't cook much these days anymore anyway? Throw in some granite counter tops and it's all good! I think we all know about the big houses with the trofy kitchens that see more action from the maid during cleaning than anything else.
Big closets: I think everyone wants more storage so maybe some corporate architect and some other big cheeses has actually figured out that houses with big closets and smaller rooms actually sell better? Same with big bathrooms.
These are just some crazy ideas that I made up just now... :-)
My Favorites at the moment are located near Gainsville Va. 800k gets you 3200 sq ft and a neighbor's home within 30'. No charge for the average 2 1/2 hour commute to metro DC. They throw that in as a bonus.
I grew up in No VA and know exactly what you are talking about.... and remember when Gainsville was no more than an intersection of 2 roads. Glad to be out of the rat race.
I wonder how many people buy a house thinking "this is where we can raise our kids, build a nice life for our family".
Seems like everyone is so focussed on work anymore that a house is just a place to sleep and eat in between commuting to work and driving the kids hither and yon so they can "play".
A house isn't so much a home anymore as an investment, a stepping stone to greater wealth . At least that's the impression I get.
My parents live in Bristow, right outside of Gainesbille.
Bought their house (in a subdivision) nine years ago for $280k. Had to drive on a gravel road to get there. Now that road is two lanes each way and they had someobdy knock on thier door and offer them $950k for their 2900 square feet and .45 acres.
Of course my father's drive to work went from 35 minutes to 90 minutes (on a good day).
I bet a bare .45 acres is worth darn near 900k these days in that area( to some folks).
if it were any kind of a large builder I would think that would be very well thought out
The sad thing is that, the larger the builder, usually, the less well designed the house. Counterintuitive, huh? Not really, once you go national, you need some sort of local design team just to pull permits. At the same time, the national-level accountants gripe at you for not staying on budget buying "off the shelf" plans. So, where do you adjust the costs? Hire ever-less qualified "designers" and then replace most of them with "drafters" and keep calling that cost-effective "productivity gains" . . . Occupational hazard of my occupation not being around (sorry Bubba)
My nephew who is in construction took me to a big subdivision he was working on and pointed out all the "eye candy" which they had put into certain houses.. Cost didley squat to build or install but had a big oooooooh...........aaaaaaaah factor. The rest of the house was built crap but they sold fast because of the "eye candy".
The sales people really pointed out the fluted outside columns and the bit of ginger bread woodwork on the front porch.
roger
You're right on both accounts. Granite in the kitchen. Not much else though. There is a hole in the counter for a cook top but the appliance is extra.
There was tons of closet space, everyone does like that. This was a builder that I did not recognize so he may not be that big. I just know the layout was really lacking.
Speaking of closet space, how many people think walk in closets are a huge waste of space? I realize the need for closet space, and many of us wish we had more, but there has got to be a better design than "walk in". Any ideas?
I couldn't live with out a walkin closet. If I had the space I'd have one at least 12' X 12', maybe bigger.
My wife works retail, clothing is her business, so its inevitable that she will have a lot of the stuff, and it takes up space!
Doug
but there has got to be a better design than "walk in". Any ideas?
Well, yes, there are. That's the problem, there's as many answers as people. Just too many dependant "parts" to have the one answer.
If you use dressers & armoires, you really almost don't need a closet at all--but you do need the floor space for the furniture. If your life requires that all clutter behind a closed door, you may need more cloest space and less floor. Ok, you're drafting up a generic "bedroom," which way do you go? Big floor, small cloest; or small floor, big closet? What happens when the customer doesn't know, but grew up inbetween the extremes?
Personally, I'd have just the bed, and some built-ins as desk & dresser, and a window seat; but also with a roomy, but unfinished closet. That's me, I'm not every body (luckily for those of dissimilar opinions <g>).
It's a good question, though--probably warrants its own thread.
Occupational hazard of my occupation not being around (sorry Bubba)
It's the "walk-in" part that I object too. That is all wasted space. I like the really old style cabinet ones, where things hung parallel to the opening. At least in style - now of course even I have to go with a little more depth.But we do have a couple of Chiffarobes (sp?). I love those!
> there has got to be a better design than "walk in". Any ideas?
Sure -- Those electric conveyor things they use in dry cleaning shops. Two or three would probably be enough for DW. ;-)
-- J.S.
I put several of those units in a master bedroom closet back in 1992. They were pretty trick, and basically replaced a 7' wide double-loaded walk-in with about a 5' wide space. You also got about 4 LF of additional rod in the same depth. I actually haven't seen them advertised lately.
Bob
Given 9 ft. ceilings, another nice trick is the tilt-down balanced bar. Shirts, blouses, and jackets can hang just below the ceiling until you swing the bar down for access, and there's room for a skirt and pants height fixed bar under them. Maybe even some floor storage under that, too.
-- J.S.
Yup- did that in a remodel that had a cathedral ceiling in the closet. The tall wall got standard double rods, with the third rod on the balance rod at about 10' high. Someone needs to tell that woman she has too many clothes...lol.
Bob
I think there are two problems with modern development. But I must open with the saying, "You can't cheat an honest man." If people weren't trying to get something for nothing, there would be a lot less problems this way. Look at all the people who are buying crap manufactured in China. Why? Becasue it's cheap. Forget quality, forget that the product wears out or falls apart in less than a year, forget that it is made with exploited labor. Price tag is all that matters. (Of course, now, since all the manufacturers have gone overseas, it's nearly impossible to find an American made product and even their quality has gone down in order to compete. You get what you pay for.)
The second thought is that besides the consumer wanting the most for the least, the developer is greedy. Rape the environment and throw up a slew of cookie cutter McMansions made of the cheapest available materials by generally unskilled and uncaring labor the developer is paying nothing for because the workers are desperate and this is what you get. Should really come as no surprise.
Until we have an awakening, and I don't see that happening, things wil only get worse. Welcome to "the material world." On that cheerful note, I'll end this diatribe and get a cup of coffee. (Thinking of that, answer me this: Why will people pay $5 for a cup of coffee, but aren't willing to pay a decent amount for good housing? Maybe builders need to market their product the way Starbucks markets their coffee--of course, this assumes that Starbucks coffee is high quality....)
Actually, Starbucks coffee is a really low quality coffee bean that has been over-roasted to hide the poor quality. It's all in the marketing. I suppose the analogy is that many of the McMansions mentioned in this post are being over-built to hide the poorer quality materials.Jason
I'd heard that about Starbucks. Most people wouldn't know quality if it smacked them in the face. My wife's ex had to have the best, but he only knew it was good by the price tag. Drank single malt scotch and so on, but I doubt whether he could have told the difference in a blind taste test.
I think there are two problems with modern development. But I must open with the saying, "You can't cheat an honest man." If people weren't trying to get something for nothing, there would be a lot less problems this way. Look at all the people who are buying crap manufactured in China. Why? Becasue it's cheap. Forget quality, forget that the product wears out or falls apart in less than a year, forget that it is made with exploited labor. Price tag is all that matters. (Of course, now, since all the manufacturers have gone overseas, it's nearly impossible to find an American made product and even their quality has gone down in order to compete. You get what you pay for.)
Why are you picking on the Chinese again? A lot of stuff is made inexpensively in China because labor is cheap, and when labor plays a large part of the manufacturing costs how does the cost of living in China automatically make the product worthless instead of inexpensive? I bet Beverly Hills wouldn't do a better job making a lot of stuff, just a better job making inexpensive stuff a lot more expensive.
Think Mexico when talking about building houses, not China. Pass a law allowing border-crossers (i.e. illegals) to be shot on sight and see how many shootings turn up on construction sites of greedy builders.
The second thought is that besides the consumer wanting the most for the least, the developer is greedy. Rape the environment and throw up a slew of cookie cutter McMansions made of the cheapest available materials by generally unskilled and uncaring labor the developer is paying nothing for because the workers are desperate and this is what you get. Should really come as no surprise.
Within three months of buying my cookie-cutter home I started realizing 'the business' and also the relative availability of quality homes in what I could afford. I spent > year post-purchase thrying to find a builder willing to build and sell to a first-timer a quality built smaller home for the same amount of money I spent already. Guess what? There weren't any. And being a first-time homebuyer without 20-30% down up-front with registered remaining costs plus available resources for overages, no custom builder was going to consider building me a small, but quality-built home.
All the custom builders in my area were focusing on 3-10X or more what I could afford. Only cookie-cutter builders were building for under $750K, something three times what I could afford. So, should I have done without for the principal at hand?
Until we have an awakening, and I don't see that happening, things wil only get worse. Welcome to "the material world." On that cheerful note, I'll end this diatribe and get a cup of coffee. (Thinking of that, answer me this: Why will people pay $5 for a cup of coffee, but aren't willing to pay a decent amount for good housing? Maybe builders need to market their product the way Starbucks markets their coffee--of course, this assumes that Starbucks coffee is high quality....)
I think a large part of the problem is the county at large. First, they wish to cater to whatever building company can bring in the most in terms of deverloped property. If this means 100-homes of crap in 2-years vs. 20-homes of quality for the same dollar revenue (property taxes) they'll always take the 100-home development because there will be higher instances of resale, which drives property values a lot.
And at the same time, the counties put little or no money into inspecting and requiring more quality in what is being built. Counties could care less if the home falls apart in 2-3 years only to be torn down and rebuilt again in crappy-likeness. They also do nothing about monitoring job-site labor infringements. There can be 20-subcontractors in my community at any given time and that will amount to less than 10 people legally present in the county as the rest are illegals.
Don't believe me? Come pay me a visit. And when you do you can explain your business model for offering $250K quality built 1100-SqFt non-McMansion homes so I can tell the wife to pack things and buy one. hahahaha
"And when you do you can explain your business model for offering $250K quality built 1100-SqFt non-McMansion homes so I can tell the wife to pack things and buy one."
I wish it could happen, because I'd buy one too. Unfortunately, it'll never happen though as long as the standard is the 2,000 SF "tract shack" garbage that continues to dominate the market. One reason- appraisals.
Probably 95% of the buyers in the $250k will need a mortgage, and most of them will be 10% down or under. That means the mortgage company will require an appraisal prior to committment.
Assuming you can build a quality 3BR/1BA 1,100 SF home for the same price as the current 2,000 SF 4BR, 2BA garbage (a reasonable assumption), you could technically sell it for the same $250k, right? Wrong- the appraiser will use the 2,000 SF houses as comps, and then deduct for the one-less bedroom, the one-less bath, and the 900 SF smaller square footage. Those three items could easily knock $25-40,000 off the appraised value, if not more. Unfortunately, the higher quality construction won't be noticed by the appraiser, and even visible differences (like stained trim, perhaps) won't affect the appraised value. So, there goes your $250k sales price, unless you're selling to a cash buyer, or one with a big enough DP that the mortgage company will be comfortable loaning the balance even with the lower appraisal.
Bob
A builder will only build what he can sell. If folks are willing to buy garbage there will always be a dealer in garbage chasing his buck.
This works the same way with the poor quality inports folks have mentioned. The are manufactured for export only, the locals have no interest in things that will soon break or wear out their money is too hard to get to waste.
We have a very large appetite for garbage in this country and as long as there is demand there will be supply.
There has never been a firm law where price vs quality is concerned, it has always been "buyer beware" Unless buyers express an interest in quality it will never be a priority is the manufactor/sales cycle.
as a footnote, There are daily discussions on "Ethics in apprasials" everyday at noon in the phone booth at 1st and Main.
In keeping with the season, I guess we can either build Bedford Falls or Potterville. Are there still building & loans (maybe run by Jimmy Stewart?)?
I was thinking more of Wisteria Lane- especially if we can get the occupants as well as the houses ;)
My walkin closets are a much better use of space than the formal living room which rarely gets used. The closet is a handy place to keep all clothing at hand and used several times most days
Yep. I do it in every house I remodel. I use all that wasted space above the staircase for storage. Instead of a 12-14 foot ceiling on the way to the basement. I open the closet up into that space. The current house i'm working on gained about 9 cubic feet of storage and there is still plenty of room to get things down the stairs.
We were able to build a big storage area above the stairs in a house we did two years ago. It was stepped and added about 14 cubic feet.
Storage helps sell but I agree that walkins are kind of a waste. You end up with a lot of lost space in the middle.
Re walkin closets and: "Storage helps sell but I agree that walkins are kind of a waste. You end up with a lot of lost space in the middle."
Generally speaking, I'd say you are correct. But doesn't have to be that way. Some of the more intelligent walkin closets I've seen now place an island of cabs in the center and use drawers for storage of socks, scarves, purses, shoes, etc etc etc.DUM SPIRO SPERO: "While I breathe I hope"
A couple of years ago during the spring home tours I went to look at a house that was sponsored by Midwet Living Magazine. Now this was a $750k house.
The first thing that I was from the sidewalk was the shinners in the trim around the doors and windows.
They had FIVE PICTURES of fireplaces. At least that is what I called them. Direct vent gas "fireplaces" that where just stuck in the wall. No hearth or surround, just stuck in the wall.
And the kitchen was a very, very large room with counter tops across one end and an island. The setup would have been good for a cooking school, but not for a family.
And I tried the fan in the master bathroom. I have heard playing cards in bike spokes that sounded better.
Whats amazing is that people are lined up out the door to buy this.
I would venture to say that less than 5% of the general public can't see the errors and junk pointed out by you guys.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
WWPD
"I would venture to say that less than 5% of the general public can't see the errors and junk pointed out by you guys." (Sailfish)I agree, but that percentage increases dramatically as they "live with the errors". The errors then become a discouraging thing as they work to pay for the thing.
"I would venture to say that less than 5% of the general public can't see the errors and junk pointed out by you guys." (Sailfish)
I agree, but that percentage increases dramatically as they "live with the errors". The errors then become a discouraging thing as they work to pay for the thing.
This is very true, and especially so for first-time buyers. Until one begins the new process they often will overlook the errors due to the WoW effect of their prospective first home.
I now easily see the [major] errors in drywall, framing, tiling, masonary, finish carpentry, HVAC, plumbing, etc. and I owe a lot of that to all the good folks on FH for their ethics in trade vs. my descriptions of a less ethical (in trade) reality. I don't come to FH to complain. I come to identify a real problem, and once confirmed then complain.
a friend put it best these tract builders arent selling houses they are selling financing,and unfortunately there are alot of ignorant customers out there. this dallas market is full of junk built by half of mexico. we dont even have 20% down to work with; lots of luck to my fellow craftsmen
The best set up you can hope for is to get a 20%er who bought one of these by mistake, and you get to fix it.
I have been working on and off (mostly on) for an older woman who bought a $750K example of this type of workmanship. I have been on her new house since June, tear things out, replace, finish it, etc.
Funny thing about this client - once she spots something, I fix / replace - makes something else look bad -- that's my next job. She pays monthly in full - I love it! We maintain a revolving job list - started with about a half page in June, have been as high as 1.5 pages, never below 5 items.
I no longer have any business downtime - can always work at this house. I do not sell any projects to her, she will point to something and I will suggest several solutions - she picks and it goes on the list. Time and materials.
Jim
Never underestimate the value of a sharp pencil or good light.
This is the exact reason my wife and I bought a 2000sqft 55 year old neglected cape cod. It may look outdated but a little TLC is making this house really standout. I am in the middle of renovating a half bath and small 100sqft library. It is a full tear out. I am sure you can imagine the quality of the construction. I couldn't be happier!
I'd much rather have an older house. My biggest problem w/ most new construction is that it all sits in these "detached condo" communities. I dont know if they'd let the likes of me live there anyway. If they did I dont think i'd be happy. Not real big on asking permission on what color I can paint my front door.
I think there are a couple of areas that can cause, or give rise to, this kind of quality issues in cookie-cutter construction. Initially, its the lowest bidder subcontractor that seems to be getting all of the work. Take one licensed subcontractor and 15 illegal aliens and you have a winning business model for cookie-cutter construction. Its cheap, quick, and as the only licensed individual within the subcontractor company you sit back, give orders in broken english, and live high on the hog.
The other problem is something I observed first-hand, and others reminded me about over the past few years: lazy superattendent. When I bought my first home I did not yet have critical eyes to call a lot of things into question. I chalked this up to inexperience, but then after a couple of years of observation realize the super just didn't watch what the subcontractors were doing. Countless mistakes, short-sheetings, and "I don't want to know" led to a huge negative impact on the development.
Finally, the builder fire the super and most of the cheap subcontractors and started paying a little more attention. Wham! Sales jumped through the roof. Unfortunately, all of those in phase-1 homes will need to accept the average resale time, which is like 2-years on the market, presently. Still, maybe someone should start a 'shoot & post' thread of bad construction. lol I am sure someone on this forum will take it to heart (and why, unless they are part of that bad workmanship problem) and flame those for posting.
I'm not a builder, but a pretty good DIY guy. It's the same in the western suburbs of Chicago. $500,000 new construction ... cheap vinyl windows, drywall returns inside, no casings ... plastic coated MDF baseboards ... molded 6-panel doors ... 25-year roof shingles already flapping in the wind ... also, I never realized that vinyl siding could be made that thin!
Maybe some of the blame lies with MTV's "Cribs;" a show dedicated to popularizing the worst and most extreme aspects of consumerism. Immature, uneducated athletes and pop musicians spend their millions on the gaudiest, glitziest, tackiest crap conceivable, and some schmuck viewer gets the erroneous impression that acres of cheap marble tile, gold plated bathroom fixtures, and swimming pools complete with grottoes and waterfalls equals the good life.
Most people envy that builder/developer .
Not many folks are on thier pay scale. 1 million plus a year to bring to the house , then pat momma and put the kids to sleep. They geter done .
Tim
I don't think too many people envy that particular builder Tim. That one street sub is a dog. It's been dragging for years. The neo look is nothing more than a gimic and most buyers don't want to be saddled with the extensive maintenance (tons of caulking and too many gallons of paint) that the look delivers.
Michiganders aren't interested in artsy fartsy homes. We want big, open floorplanned, lots of brick, McMansions. Don't try to sell us that neo traditional junk.
Oh yeah, deliver them to us cheaply too. Were not interested in paying a million dollars for 1000 sq ft of upscale baloney. Just give us the footage baby!
I get a kick out of discussions like this. The chicken littles act like the earth is destroyed when a house is built, then 4 Lorn1 praises the Japanese, who would put 6 familys in the condo I'm living in.
Sorry folks, I don't want to live in a cube that I rent for $1000 per month, looking at a 6" television.
I'd be curios about the living arrangements of all the McMansion complainers. Are they all holed up in their inner city co-ops, or are they out in the suburbs or country being a hypocrite.
For the most part, I think jealousy and sour grapes fuels these discussions.
blue
I dont know anything about that style . He just said theres 50 new houses all together .
Any time youve got the balls to build 50 houses normally means one of two things .
You cant be any more bankrupt than broke no matter what amount was set. But there seems to more style in bankrupting several million. Or maybe its about class , I dunno.
You get filthy rich . As the old timers say you get set . One poker type move and its time to retire with one lump sum.
Not a bad gamble .
Tim
Isn't the old Willow Run plant closed? That would make one heck of house wouldn't it? Or put a couple dormers on an airplane hanger or a warehouse. I'm sort of funnin' with you. I would not want to live like they do in Japan. Like those things in bus stations where you put in some coins and you can stay in a locked cubical about the size of a coffin in case you are too drunk to make it home. Now, that's living!
Re: "Like those things in bus stations where you put in some coins and you can stay in a locked cubical about the size of a coffin in case you are too drunk to make it home. Now, that's living!"Actually many has been the time I wished there were a few of these sorts of establishments scattered about. Traveling I resent having to pay $60 to $120 for a hotel room when all I really want is a bed, shelter from weather, a toilet and a hot shower. And this for only six to ten hours. Coffin motels make a lot of sense. A small private room with heat and AC, a radio, computer access and TV. Adequate room to lay down, spread a piece of luggage at the foot of the bed and enough room to sit up. Just enough room for two if they are on a first name basis and interested in business best done in bed. Toilet and shower are communal and down the hall so bring a robe and slippers. All this for $10 to $20.I can see a definite need and desire for such a facility at regular intervals along the highways. I don't think I'm alone in having such modest requirements when traveling just to get there, as opposed to vacations and leisure where travel is part of the fun and a larger room might be salutary. Of course even the Japanese don't normally live for long in such spartan conditions as a coffin hotel. While few Japanese live in even a average sized home of a decade ago their average home, if a meaningful average can be extracted from such a diverse market, is well appointed and comfortable if small by current standards. But then again the Japanese have, IMO, maintained some perspective of what a house is really about, a home and a machine for living.