Tag Archives: single-family homes

Millennials want smaller, smarter, purposeful, customizable homes

Posted on by

A new real estate survey from Better Homes and Gardens suggests Millennials have different tastes in homes:

Better Homes and Gardens® Real Estate today released national survey findings of 18-35 year-old Americans that reveal the next generation of homeowners are rewriting the rules to homeownership and reinterpreting traditional norms to fit their values. Results indicate that the next generation of homeowners seeks essential, purposeful homes (77%) equipped with the technological capabilities they have grown accustomed to, as opposed to stereotypical luxury homes preferred by many in their parents’ generation. The findings also demonstrate that 82 percent of “Millennials” surveyed embrace their independence with gusto and prefer to handle home improvements on their own instead of turning to their parents for money; a stark contrast to the general misconception that paints young Americans as coddled or entitled.

“It’s critical that real estate professionals understand what embodies a quintessential home for the Millennial generation, which vastly differs from the traditional norms of generations before them,” said Sherry Chris, president and CEO of Better Homes and Gardens Real Estate LLC. “These survey findings allow our brand to continue to best serve the next generation of homebuyers and find homes that can or do appeal to their lifestyles and unique spirit. Understanding technologies to communicate with this generation is now only one piece of the puzzle for agents; ‘smart’ technological capabilities must now be ingrained into the home itself.”…

Unlike their Baby Boomer parents, 77 percent of Millennials surveyed would prefer an “essential” home compared to a grand stereotypical luxury home. This generation wants their living quarters to be as unique as they are; more customized and less “cookie cutter” (43%). To that end, Millennials seek for each room of their home to serve a purpose fit for their lifestyle. For instance, 1 in 5 of survey respondents agree that “home office” is a more appropriate name for their dining room based on what they typically use it for, and 43 percent would like to transform their living room into a home theater.

If this is true across the board for Millennials, what sort of current housing options appeal most to them? Gentrifying neighborhoods? Urban lofts? New Urbanist developments? It would be fascinating to see some builders and developers go after this age group like they might with Dell Webb type communities that are clearly intended for a certain age range. However, this might not be as lucrative as providing housing for older buyers and such a sales pitch might go against the independent streak of Millennials…

The most common words found in American real estate listings

Posted on by

A new analysis looks at the 100 most common words found in American real estate listings with “beautiful” sitting at #1:

Point2Homes, which provides marketing services to real estate agents, ran the numbers on 300,000 active listings in the United States in the first half of 2012 to see which household features and characteristics were thought by their listing agents to attract buyer interest. Though such chestnuts as “must see” and “spacious” pervade the listing verbiage, it was interesting to note which other specifics appear to merit singling out, according to Roxana Baiceanu, a spokesman for the company…

But she said the analysts were a bit surprised to see the emphasis on such specifics as hardwood floors and stainless steel, which placed second and third, respectively, on the overall frequency list.

In all, the top 100 terms aren’t particularly surprising — nearly every listing in the history of American real estate would have you believe that there’s no such thing as an unappealing home. That list includes such predictables as “stunning,” “sunny,” “finest,” “perfect,” “super” and “spectacular,” along with more concrete features such as “home office,” “soaking tub” and “dishwasher.” But when Point2 started breaking the findings into geographic regions and price segments, it was a little more revealing…

Geographically, homes for sale in the Midwest and along the East Coast seem stuck in that “beautiful” rut, where that word held the No. 1 spot. But on the West Coast and in the South, “stainless steel appliances” went to the top of the heap, she said. Midwesterners also liked “fireplaces,” which showed up with two variations in the top 10; Eastern states placed a premium on “move-in condition;” the South was the only region to put the legendarily coveted “granite countertops” in its top tier of listing terms.

It is interesting to see stainless steel and hardwood floors up there. While these might be desirable features, they are relatively quick fixes to homes while other features, such as “open concept,” are harder to change.

This list suggests several things to me:

1. Selling a home involves a lot of marketing. This is obvious but seeing this list full of vague and positive words is an extra reminder.

2. This list is like a set of code words. If you aren’t familiar with real estate listings, these may strike you in one way but if you commonly see such words, you can read between the lines.

3. I wonder what happens to homes whose listings don’t feature these common words. Is there a penalty? Would this help the home stand out to a particular kind of buyer?

State of the housing market: spring here but inventory of homes for sale still down

Posted on by

Even though spring is often the time when the housing market picks up, inventory is still down as we approach March:

But a return to healthy inventory levels could take years. Many homeowners can’t afford to sell because they don’t have enough equity to put into buying another house — or would have to write a check to sell. The supply of distressed houses for sale is thinning as the foreclosure crisis recedes, especially in some states. Home building, while improving, is still at low levels. And, after years of holding on, few homeowners want to sell when prices are just coming off the bottom, Realtors say.

“We’re making a painful transition from a market dominated by distressed sellers to a market in which the only people selling are people who want to sell,” says Glenn Kelman, CEO of online brokerage Redfin.

The nation now has a 4.2-month supply of existing homes for sale. A healthy market, defined as a six-month to seven-month supply, will arrive when home prices rise another 20%, estimates John Burns, CEO of John Burns Real Estate Consulting.

A jump that size will lure enough sellers to match demand pouring in from renters and investors, he says. Rising prices will also drive more home building, he says…

Nationwide, almost 28% of homeowners with a home loan owe more on their loan than their home is worth, data from market watcher Zillow show. That’s 13.8 million homeowners. They’d likely have to write a check to sell, especially if they have to pay a Realtor.

In other words, a housing recovery will still take some time. Even with foreclosures easing, prices have not recovered to the point where more people want to or can sell.

One thing I like about this article: it doesn’t engage in speculation about when the market will be back to “normal.” Too often, real estate articles are full of people making predictions about when the tide will turn. Shouldn’t years of more uncertainty like the last few years make us at least a little more conscious about making such predictions? Also, we might be closer to recognizing that perhaps times like this might be “normal” for a while.

I wonder how much this data/information is related to lower levels of mobility in the United States…

How a developer of big homes differentiates his homes from McMansions

Posted on by

Few builders are aiming to have their new big homes labeled McMansions. Here is how one developer describes how his new homes differ from McMansions:

According to brothers Taylor and Milton Chamberlin, the goal for the Georgian style homes is for them to be an alternative to “McMansions.”

“We really take our time to design the homes to fit in the neighborhood. We’re not builders that come in and put this huge McMansion in a small neighborhood where it doesn’t fit. That’s not what we do,” said Taylor. “All of this is really thought through and it’s really livable, usable space. It’s not those McMansions where you walk in and wonder, ‘What do you do in this room?’”

The base model runs around $1.4 million and features four bedrooms and 4.5 bathrooms, with the possibility of another bedroom and bathroom on an additional level. Costs will vary based on the different lot sizes and individual add-ons the purchasers want in their homes…

Another goal is to foster a 1950s sense of community among the owners of the nine properties, in which everybody knows and interacts with their neighbors. The homes will only be accessible via a private road and there will be a small fence around the subdivision…

The brothers noted The Barrett Companies’ effort toward green building and energy efficiency. From better insulation and caulking to installing appropriate outlets in the detached garages for plugging in an electric car, the Chamberlins believe small touches make their properties stand out.

These are big new homes that at first glance might fit several traits of McMansions. But, here is the argument the developer uses to say their homes are not McMansions:

1. The homes will fit the neighborhood. Critics argue McMansions, particularly teardowns, can disrupt the character of existing neighborhoods.

2. The home is not just about space; it is about well-designed and usable space. One argument about McMansions is that they provide lots of square footage but this is often contained in cavernous rooms or in poor layouts that are difficult to utilize in day-to-day life.

3. They are hoping to promote a community atmosphere in their small development. I wonder if this is primarily a function of size; the fenced-in neighborhood with a private road will only contain nine homes.

4. These homes will be greener than normal big homes. McMansions are often said to about excessive consumption and part of sprawl.

5. There will be a consistent design scheme with Georgian architecture and detached garages on the private road away from the streets surrounding the neighborhood. McMansions are criticized for mixing architectural styles.

In the end, I wonder if a majority of buyers and critics would think these reasons are enough to separate these homes from McMansions. These are still big homes in the midst of suburban neighborhoods. They may be more consistent and be less mass-produced but are they different enough?

“Exporting the McMansion” to China

Posted on by

A principal in an American architecture firm discusses the McMansions his company has designed in China:

Market researchers in China say that these buyers prefer styles (derived from) the old houses in France and England. The people feel that the styles of the English and French are more “wealthy looking” than Spanish or Mediterranean styles. Think of “Downton Abbey” or Fontainebleau. Those are perceived as the homes of royalty. Homes in Spain or Italy, they perceive those homes as more casual…

The villa houses we’re building are generally 3,500 square feet to 7,000 square feet, and that excludes the basement, which isn’t usually included in the salable square footage…Some of these homes are being purchased by investors and some of them will be second homes. Lagoon Manor, for example, is a 600-unit development we’re doing that’s in the northeast part of Beijing, though from the heart of the city it’s about an hour-and-a-half drive because of the traffic…

The homes are of concrete construction. Even the roof pitches are concrete panels — there’s almost no wood in the construction.

The interiors are built to a European construction model. You buy the shell and finish the interior yourself. The outsides of the homes are completely finished, but you open the front door and it’s a light bulb.

This discussion suggests there are some similarities between American and Chinese McMansions. They are purchased by people who want to show wealth and the architecture is intended to connect the style of the new home to established “high-class” styles. The homes are quite large and expensive. However, they are constructed differently: it is more of a concrete shell that the buyer can then customize in pieces (IKEA is mentioned). While the discussion doesn’t mention this, I assume these homes are less common in China than the United States and so are still more unusual.

Indeed, it would be interesting to see what remains the same and what changes and why when the American McMansion becomes another global export.

First passive house in Illinois completed

Posted on by

The Chicago Tribune profiled a River Forest home that is the first in Illinois to be certified as a passive house:

To earn certification, the house had to pass a third-party audit that included a blower-door test to detect air leaks, a visual inspection to make sure specified products were used, and an air-flow test of the ventilation system to ensure that incoming and outgoing air was balanced.

Including the finished basement, the house has 3,800 square feet plus a detached, two-car garage. That includes three upstairs bedrooms, an open living area plus in-law suite for Corinna’s parents on the main level and a recreational room on the lower level.

The first thing a visitor notices about the Lemas’ house is its 18-inch-thick exterior walls. They contain the key to keeping the house airtight — Logix insulated concrete forms, which are Lego-like panels of concrete and foam. Outside of that is a 2-inch rigid foam layer, an air cavity and SmartSide engineered wood siding…

The Lemas figure they spent about $175 per square foot on the house, including site work and demolition of the house that used to occupy the property. That is on par with custom residences that are not passive houses, said Bassett-Dilley.

Interesting article though I wish more time was spent on the process of building the home, such as passing inspections and hearing from neighbors, rather than the particular pieces that went into the home.

While this is the first passive home in Illinois, I wonder what the resale market for such homes might look like in the near future. Is there a premium homesellers can ask for since such homes are rare?

Also, I have read a number of articles about such homes but haven’t really seen anyone discuss possible downsides. What happens if the air exchanger, needed to bring in air since the house is so sealed, goes out? Are there longer-term issues that come up amongst homeowners in such houses?

Trying to save a Sears home in Oakbrook Terrace

Posted on by

Historic preservation is a common topic in older suburbs and one effort in Oakbrook Terrace features a more unusual Sears home:

The city purchased the house of the late longtime city clerk Lorraine Fik in 2008 with plans to demolish it to create a retention pond when it builds a new police station east of city hall. That work is expected to start this summer.

Saving the house, located across from city hall at 17W245 16th St., would require the city to provide water retention by other means, such as under the police station — a more costly option.

The move to preserve the house began after the recently formed historical society contacted architectural historian Rebecca Hunter of Elgin, who found proof of the home’s authenticity in the markings on the basement floor joists. The prefabricated home was built by Lorraine Fik’s husband, Edward, around 1950, and Lorraine had her clerk’s office in the basement until the city got a building of its own.

Kelly Fik, Lorraine’s youngest son, provided the historical society with photos of the house being delivered by truck and read a letter from the Fik family at Tuesday’s city council meeting.

These mail order Sears homes were produced in the early 1900s. Here are some more examples of Sears homes from the Chicago suburbs. On one hand, such homes are unusual and prior to the post-World War II era, mass produced homes were more rare. The era of the large-scale builder had not yet arrived. On the other hand, the homes don’t appear to be too unusual. Why save these homes just because they happened to come through a catalog over other homes built in the same era?

Another note: it is interesting to look at some of these examples and see how people have altered the Sears homes over the years.

How much do McMansions contribute to traffic congestion?

Posted on by

After seeing the Washington D.C. region leads the country in traffic, one reader of the Washington Post suggests McMansions have contributed to the problem:

Regarding the Feb. 5 news article “Washington again rated worst for traffic congestion in annual study”:

I don’t understand. The entire metropolitan region builds, builds and builds, squeezing  condos onto every block and ruining old neighborhoods with ghastly McMansion and townhouse developments.

Do officials consider quality of life? Don’t they realize how these new homes have a tremendous effect on our local traffic? We have overbuilt this area to death.

It would be interesting to see a study on this. I suspect the real answer is not McMansions over other forms of housing and development but rather the issue of sprawl. McMansions may often be found as part of sprawl but not necessarily; McMansions don’t have to be built on large lots, which leads to more spread out development, and they can be built as teardowns in denser areas. But once sprawl has already happened, it is more difficult to provide effective mass transit (even as the Washington region sees an expansion of Metro service to suburban counties). In other words, McMansions are symptoms of sprawl which leads to a lot of driving and traffic.

We know a McMansion when we see the outside but what is inside?

Posted on by

A Quora forum member asks a broad yet intriguing question about McMansions: “What do McMansions look like on the inside?” Most of the attention McMansions receive is about the exterior. There are several common issues. It simply looks like a large house. Such homes do not have a consistent design as they can borrow from a variety of architectural styles. The house looks imposing from the street. The garage, at least two cars, can dominate the facade. The home does not fit with the style of the rest of the neighborhood. It may dwarf nearby homes. The front may be well-appointed but the sides and rear have vinyl siding, little brick, and little character. All of these critiques have something in common: houses should fit in with their surroundings and also present a coherent and less-than-ostentatious image. One group who have critiqued McMansions at times, New Urbanists, tend to make this argument that homes should be part of a larger neighborhood and have less to say about the interiors of large homes.

But, there is another aspect to McMansions that seems to receive less attention. I assume the reason for this is fairly obvious: most observers of McMansions, whether they are driving by homes on the way home from work or academics writing about the phenomenon, have less access to the interiors. In other words, homes are private spaces that generally aren’t open to private viewing. We might know some of the broad trends: people in recent years like granite countertops and stainless steel appliances, McMansions can have large foyers, there is a lot of interior space including rooms in addition to the standard ones, relatively more money is spent on the size of the home so less is devoted to long-lasting appointments, and McMansion owners may have little furniture or nice appointments because they spent so much on the house (this is a common stereotype).

There are architects and others who are more worried about the interiors of large homes. Architect Sarah Susanka, developer of the Not So Big House, argues that it is much better to have a home that fits a homeowner’s individual needs than to simply have a large house. She advocates for custom spaces within a home that both reflect the individual tastes of the homeowners as well as their activities. In contrast, McMansions are viewed as soulless homes that homeowners must fit into rather than the other way around. There are also others who argue there should more of a psychological fit between homeowners and their home.

This reminds me of the 1981 book The Meaning of Things: Domestic Symbols and the Self. The two researchers spent time observing people’s homes as well as talking to them about how they related to the objects they had in their home. I think there is a lot more research that could be done in this area. On one hand, we often buy into the idea that the products we buy and display say something about us (and we often also view our homes as expressions of our self) and yet, we don’t think too deeply about this most of the time.

Online discussion of how to avoid selling a home to someone who will build a teardown McMansion

Posted on by

I ran into an interesting online discussion originating out of the North Center neighborhood in Chicago: how can a seller keep their home from becoming a teardown McMansion? Here is the discussion starter:

To my wonderful North Center Neighbors,

My partner & I will be selling our late, well built, 2 bedrm late 1800’s home in a few months( through Baird Warner-realtors need not contact me). We have lived here for 20 yrs, and love North Center with all of it’s old homes & history, which seems to be on the endangered list, becoming prey to developers of McMansions. So…my question is this; Is there a way to ensure(legally) we don’t sell to a developer, or sell to someone who would want to do a tear down? I am a firm believer in preserving & protecting our well built old homes, which also serves to lessen the impact on the environment.

Thank you in advance for any insight.

Here are a few of the responses (separate responses in each paragraph):

No, unless it’s a landmarked property, people can do whatever they want. The good news is, many people WANT a sweet old house with a yard and will not McMansion a home if it’s a solid, well-functioning property. Good luck with your sale!

You could do a restrictive covenant. A restrictive covenant is a type of real covenant, a legal obligation imposed in a deed by the seller upon the buyer of real estate to do or not to do something. Such restrictions frequently “run with the land” and are enforceable on subsequent buyers of the property.

Yes, restrictive covenant is an option but it will decrease your ability to sell. As said, the covenant runs with the land so not only does it restrict next owner but it will also restrict future owners as well. So this will significantly bring down the sales price. I’ve actually not heard of this being done in a sale situation, just through estates and gifts of land. My guess is that your lawyer will recommend against it. However, you could discuss putting conditions in the real estate contract (which only run to the next owner). Talk to the lawyer you intend to use for the sale.

Another solution is mentioned by another commentator: blocks or neighborhoods could enact or argue for particular zoning rules that could limit what kind of teardown home could be built. Of course, it takes more work to get a lot of neighbors to agree and then have the powers-that-be put the new restrictions into practice.

I suppose another option would be to rent the current home and purchase elsewhere. Thus, the current owner still retains some control over the property even though they would then have to manage it.

Thinking more broadly, I wonder how many Americans would go the extra step to try to preserve their existing house. I suspect most Americans tend to see their homes more as temporary housing solutions rather than structures they really care about and would want to preserve for future generations. This could be a function of having suburban neighborhoods where homes may be somewhat interchangeable, an American interest in mobility, or a rise in disposable consumerism where more goods are seen as temporary.