These days, a bigger home isn't always a better one: Recent research suggests that homes being built today are getting smaller.
The average size of homes started in the third quarter of 2008 was 2,438 square feet, down from 2,629 square feet in the second quarter, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Similarly, the median size of homes started in the third quarter was 2,090, down from 2,291. The statistics confirm what the housing industry has suspected for a while. ...
According to the Better Homes and Gardens study, top priorities in a new home include an affordable price, natural light and comfortable family gathering places. The era of super-sizing may be ending, Butler said, with buyers looking for a home that is "right-sized, organized and economized."
Monday, February 02, 2009
New homes are being built smaller
From MarketWatch.com:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
Thank god. I guess the one thing that I would like to see added to this is to add elements from the "Passive Haus" standards that have been developed in Europe - the idea is that the energy requirements to heat and cool the house are dramatically lower than that of a regular house.
ReplyDeleteI still like kids bedrooms big anough for bed, dresser, and desk, huge kitchen, huge family room, large banquet sized diningroom, 3 car garage, large finished basement - but I want it for $90 per square foot, and NO SIDING ON THE OUTSIDE!
ReplyDeleteOh, wow. You mean they're building houses now that are more like houses they used to build a long time ago? Like, housing in urban areas? Wow, oh wow.
ReplyDeleteWho coulda guessed that living arrangements that worked for thousands of years would continue to work as suburban sprawl begins to die? (as embodied in the form of McMansions and Circuit City big box retail).
But the big houses have worked for thousands of years too. It's all part of a regular cycle. Big houses get built in the "new" suburb. They're used for a while as single family homes, then when either the new suburb moves elsewhere (or the economy tanks), these big homes become something else than single family homes (i.e.. man adapts). Then someday they may --- or maynot --- return to their original use. (I.e., they HAVE in Dupont, but in other areas then instead got torn down or just remained as multi-family or whatever.)
ReplyDelete"They're used for a while as single family homes, then when either the new suburb moves elsewhere (or the economy tanks), these big homes become something else than single family homes (i.e.. man adapts)."
ReplyDeleteRight, except most of these new homes are built of pressboard and 1/2" foam. I'd be surprised if those structures last another 20 years, much less 100.
Well, 2500 square feet is big for a home in DC unless you're talking about diplomatic housing or Foxhall.
ReplyDeleteMaybe the architects started to actually work and think though their designs instead of the lazy space wasting designs they have been doing.
ReplyDeleteHomes built 50 or 60 years ago are better quality than any "new construction". If you looking for solid construction, you guys need to buy homes like Lance's bought. Strong like a castle.
ReplyDeleteSo those very large, hand-tooled brownstones that form the foundation of my 100+ year old home are a good thing?
ReplyDeleteI was jealous of everyone else's chipboard....
Yes, the brownstones are a good thing .... The problem is that Lance overpaid for his by $400k or more!!! Ouch!!
ReplyDelete"The problem is that Lance overpaid for his by $400k or more!!! Ouch!!"
ReplyDeleteDont I wish that were true. Cosmic justice would have been if Lance had been out in Loudoun county with all the wealthy people.
08 389K (-24.7%)
07 517K (-5.6%)
06 547K (+0.1%)
05 547K (+24.9%)
04 438K (+24.6%)
03 351K (+13.8%)
02 309K (+10.8%)
01 278K (+10.6%)
00 252K
Looks like average prices there aint doing so good ehh. Hows lance doing in da hood with all the poor people?
08 543K (+1.1%)
07 537K (+1.7%)
06 528K (-0.8%)
05 533K (+18.2%)
04 450K (+17.9%)
03 382K (+9.7%)
02 348K (+14.1%)
01 303K (+21.2%)
00 250K
Dont worry though. Prices in lance's hood will post huge price declines this year - just like people were predicting in 2005, 2006, 2007 & 2008...
And to think, last month saw the most refinance activity in the last 6 years. Thousands upon thousands got rid of ARMS & got fixed rate financing.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.housingwire.com/2009/01/30/with-fixed-rates-this-low-who-needs-arms/
Im sure none of those refis were in places like DC where it takes just a few thousand bucks to get out of your I/O & Option Arms.
Good thing is, Im sure they all came out of places like Loudoun where everyones underwater & need to pony up a mere 100K just to refinance. Thats a pittance to the wealthy...
And dont forget, the IO Option Arm tsunami is coming! Since no one refid there, Im sure it will be heavily concentrated in DC!
Lancey: "... everyone out of work, blood in the streets, all properties available for pennies on the dollar ... And the BHs miraculously coming out of it all unscathed with the downpayment investment still intact and their jobs still giving them a salary ... and then they'd buy that house for what they were willing to 'sacrifice' to be a homeowner!"
ReplyDeleteWhat's funny is that a couple years ago, the BH used to crow about all the $$$ they saved by renting.
Well, except for NOZ, I'm guessing that most have pissed away any savings AND lost big in last year's market.
As a HH close in, I still have my equity. As a conservative investor, I took a slight haircut last year but nothing like folks I know.
"As a HH close in, I still have my equity. As a conservative investor, I took a slight haircut last year but nothing like folks I know."
ReplyDeleteI remember when I bought in the immunozone. I had to pull a big chunk out of the market in order to make it work.
My home has lost 8-10% value in the last 2 years. Had I kept that money in the market it would have lost 40%.
Turns out overpaying for a home was a pretty shrewd financial move!!!
Anonymous said...
ReplyDelete"My home has lost 8-10% value in the last 2 years. Had I kept that money in the market it would have lost 40%."
Do you have a mortgage? Or did you conveniently leave that out of your equation? If you "had to pull a big chunk out of the market in order to make it work," then you almost certainly have a mortgage.
If someone put down 20% on their home and it fell 10%, they would have a 50% loss on their equity. If they put down 5% on the home and it fell 10%, they'd be down 200% on their equity. (Almost no equity gets paid off in the first few years.) In addition, your monthly payments are almost certainly higher than what it would cost to rent an equivalent home. That's a pretty shrewd financial move.
I get the sense you're either bad at math, or leaving out important details.
"I get the sense you're either bad at math, or leaving out important details."
ReplyDeleteYes. I'm guessing that, like me, he bought earlier than 2006.
As in NOZ example, I have significant equity in my place NW of Del Ray.
Any guesses as to valuations are guesses until the place is sold.
The point though is that real estate close in, has proven to be a better investment than, say, General Motors.
I moved 100% into the G fund early last year, I did not loose one dime. I am still renting, under 3 miles to my job. I fill the gas tank every other month. And in my opinion, DC is full of skanky freaks, perverts and of course polititians too.
ReplyDeleteAs whatever you recommend will assuradly be wrong..I will now buy GM at $2.89. Lets see how I do in 1 month.......
And in my opinion, DC is full of skanky freaks, perverts and of course polititians too.
ReplyDeleteWhich is why the prices are holding.
Vive le difference!
Good point James - however rework it to account for the fact I bought in 2002 and my equity position at the peak was 40%.
ReplyDelete"It was the late 1980s and Richard Florida had just moved to Washington. He didn’t know the city very well and got lost driving to a party near Dupont Circle. It was a crime-ridden neighborhood — D.C. was notorious at the time for being the nation’s murder capital — and he had no idea how to get out.
ReplyDelete“I literally called the police,” Florida recalls. “I said, ‘I don’t know where I am and I’m terrified.’ That’s how scared I was in a neighborhood that’s now completely upscale.”
Florida tells this story to demonstrate how many of D.C.’s neighborhoods that just 20 years ago were considered a no man’s land have completely transformed. During that same time Florida has become an internationally recognized authority on economic competitiveness and demographics."
Remember people - nothing ever changed in DC. IT WAS ALL BUBBLE - REVERT TO THE MEAN...
"just 20 years ago were considered a no man’s land have completely transformed."
ReplyDelete"Remember people - nothing ever changed in DC. IT WAS ALL BUBBLE - REVERT TO THE MEAN..."
Fair enough. Some real increases in housing value over the last 20 years is due to gentrification. However, why did housing prices spike up over 100% over a few years??? Did the government systematically lead all undesirables out of the area, like was done to the indians in the 1800's? Me thinks not.
"Fair enough. Some real increases in housing value over the last 20 years is due to gentrification. However, why did housing prices spike up over 100% over a few years??? Did the government systematically lead all undesirables out of the area, like was done to the indians in the 1800's? Me thinks not."
ReplyDeleteFair enough. And I really should stress this more - even in DC THERE WAS A BUBBLE!!!!
The way I see it, bubble gains evaporate and only the real gains remain. As how much is real and how much is bubble, the next 9-12 months will tell us...
Anonymous said...
ReplyDelete"Good point James - however rework it to account for the fact I bought in 2002 and my equity position at the peak was 40%."
So, your equity is down 20-25% since the peak, assuming the peak was 2 year ago. (You said your house fell in value 8-10% "in the last 2 years", not "since the peak". I want to make sure we're not mixing apples and oranges here.)
However, I can't tell how much you're up since your purchase because you didn't say how much you put down when you bought.
OK - bought at 430K had no $$ in the bank so I took 30K out of the market +10K of my own cash.
ReplyDeleteAs of last week the house appraised at 702K when I refid out of my option arm. Take out a few percent for realtor fees, transfer & rec and the like I figure I would net 240K.
So I guess my 30K is now worth 180K. Best investment I ever made!