Consistency of Square Footage listed by Builders

NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
S

SW49

New member
I've just started looking at new homes under construction.  I went to Shea's Sausalito homes in Stonegate and I believe that the listed square footage includes both the "Outdoor Retreat" as well as 2nd story open space (the space on the 2nd floor that is just open air allowing you to look down to the 1st story).  These 2 spaces total about 400 sf, which is very significant.  I understand that there is not a uniform method to measuring square footage, but my reading of standard practice would exclude both of these areas.

Does anyone have any thoughts if all of the builders are measuring this the same way?  I'm assuming this makes a $/sf comparison of homes very difficult, especially against homes that don't have the "Outdoor Retreat (or California Room).  I also don't really understand how an "Outdoor Retreat" without enclosed walls is counted when they don't count a garage.  It seems very inconsistent.
 
Are you looking at the square footage of the models?

Those can be off (because of options) and you should get final square footage of the actual home you are buying (with options). That should be more accurate.
 
I don't think they include that space nor the outdoor space since neither shows as an option you can convert to additional space.

You should ask a sales staff to explain what is included in the 4011sft.
 
If you use the ruler and chop both floors up into rectangles, you'll prob get 4,000 w/o the ca room or 'open to below space' and not double counting the stairs area. I can see at least 3800 very roughly.
 
SW49 said:
I'm just talking about the Base Plan square footage without any of the options.  For instance, the Plan 3 Square Footage is listed at 4011 sf, but if you look at the individual room measurements per the link below, it is fairly clear that this 4011 sf includes the Outdoor Retreat as well as open space on the 2nd floor.
http://www.sheahomes.com/community/sausalito/floorplan/0003/
Click to expand...

I roughly get to 3,896 sq ft without counting the stairs on either floor so 4,011 sounds about right. Remember that they count interior walls.
 

Attachments

  • downstairs.png
    downstairs.png
    35.6 KB · Views: 108
  • upstairs.png
    upstairs.png
    37.3 KB · Views: 97
If you have the address, another way to find out the square footage is from the Irvine's city permit website.  The attached example is for another stonegate house.  You can look at the permit or valuation to find the square footage registered to the city.

House Building & Safety
https://irvinepermits.org/Default.asp?Build=PM.pmPermit.SearchForm&utask=normalview



 

Attachments

  • 83 Medford.png
    83 Medford.png
    98.8 KB · Views: 106
I've mentioned this in other posts, so regrets if you've heard this before.

About a year ago I had been working on a loan for a new construction condo that for all intents and purposes was a rectangle. The builders SF was 1,000. BofA had it at 950 SF. Our appraisal had it at 980 SF. How can three separate measurements of a simple rectangle be so off?

The builder measured the property without pony walls and likely before drywall hung.

BofA didn't include the stairwell, which most appraisers do count.

We included the stairwell, but had takeaways for the pony walls.

The bottom line is that you're going to find terrific variance between each estimate - City, Builder, Appraiser, Inspector, Flooring Contractor, etc. If the SF difference is more than 250 SF from the source you are relying on, is there some relief in the purchase contract (or builder protections for lower SF measured)?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top