Citing recent housing figures, USA Today argues that McMansions are “out of vogue”:
Fran DiBello of Cleveland didn’t need a lot of room. For her, a three-story townhome has everything she could need.
“I really like the style of this home,” she says. “It’s very efficient. The appliances, the heat.”
It also has a view of Lake Erie and an 8-minute commute to work. Ten years ago, this neighborhood wasn’t here; 10 years ago, these homes would have been over shadowed by the McMansion.
“A McMansion was a trophy — often times a house with five or six bedrooms when you only needed two,” says Scott Phillips, real-estate agent with Keller Williams in Clevekand.
The median size of homes purchased in 2008, the most recent year for which figures are available, is 1,825 square feet. For first-time buyers it is 1,580 square feet, according to the National Association of Realtors.
A majority of the homes Phillips sells are less than 1,700 square feet.
Some consider it an outgrowth of being green; others see it as people living within their means.
Another shift in housing trends also means a move closer to the city’s core, Phillips says.
Numbers show that 90% of home sales nationwide are to young professionals looking for urban housing.
“People like to live where they’re closer to the amenities, the parks, nightlife, grocery stores,” he says.
The article seems to invoke several meanings of McMansions:
1. A more suburban home. This is contrasted with a desire for more urban homes in these tougher economic times.
2. A large home, a “trophy” where people bought a bunch of space that they really didn’t need. It is also suggested that this is wasteful of both money and resources (not being “green”).
But overall, the real story of the article seems not be about McMansions but about the most recent patterns: a shrinking median size of homes purchased and a rise in demand for urban housing among young professionals. This is contrasted with the “McMansion,” that exemplar of all suburban housing and of American housing excess.
About these newer trends:
1. This article cites the median size of homes purchased in 2008. The typical figures cited for home size is the size of the average new home purchased. This figure is still over 2,400 square feet though this is down a bit from the peak of several years ago. The median size is rarely cited and this article doesn’t provide any comparison so that we would know how this size in 2008 compares with previous years.
2. I also had not heard of this figure that “90% of home sales nationwide are to young professionals looking for urban housing.” This is remarkable if it is true. It suggests that this group is the primary one driving the market and that they clearly prefer more urban living. This corroborates what the National Association of Home Builders has discussed.
3. Is this a long-term trend or will Americans seek larger homes once the economy picks up? See my thoughts here.