home features not in demand

NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
Patrick J. Star said:
You kind of describe my house --- 5/3, 2400 sq ft with formal living room/dining and then the back yard facing portion of the lower level is kitchen (w/island), breakfast nook, and smaller family room in a 'great room' layout --- but not as big as if the entire first floor were open, naturally.  While we would like the living room in particular to be a bit larger and we don't use the formal living room much --- it is nice to have that sanitized formal space off the entry.  For casual guests (like kids parents picking up from a playdate) we can invite them into a nice space for casual chit chat without bringing them into our personal space, which we don't feel as pressed to keep neat for informal visitors.
Click to expand...
Yep.
BUT, having had a formal dining room (which seats up to 10) I would NEVER go back to a having just a great room --- we had that in our previous home, although it was not so great.  The separate formal dining room is amazing if you are into entertaining family or friends.
Click to expand...
Double Yep.
We also have a downstairs bedroom and full bath + four more up --- and all very good sized, bigger than we typically see in new homes.  I don't know why they could fit all this into 2400 sq ft in 1997, but can't in 2012. 
Click to expand...
Hat Trick!

What I've been saying all this time... my old 3CWG was 2405sft and it fit all that AND vaulted ceilings. Yes... bigger/wider footprint (which naturally a 3CWG creates), but even in narrower ones... you should still be able to put all this living space in considering you are removing the vaulted space.
 
developers find places to add footage regardless whether you needed it or not. I heard from a contractor who built them the cost is $58/sf and the developer then charges the buyer $320/sf. That is a lot of profit.


traceimage said:
Patrick J. Star said:
We also have a downstairs bedroom and full bath + four more up --- and all very good sized, bigger than we typically see in new homes.  I don't know why they could fit all this into 2400 sq ft in 1997, but can't in 2012.
Click to expand...

My totally unqualified opinion is that homebuilders today are putting the square footage into unnecessary areas. Most new developments I've seen have huge master bathrooms, large his-and-hers closets, and big laundry rooms. The only reason I can think of to do this (since it doesn't make a house "feel" larger) is that it contributes to an "I have a luxurious, rich-person house" sentiment on the part of buyers.

Older homes seem to be more practical. My house (built in the 70s) has a laundry room, master bath, and closets, but they aren't really big--just functional.
Click to expand...
 
Why would a builder builds a 200 sf vaulted space when he could floor over that for $800 and turn it into $63,000 profit.

irvinehomeowner said:
Patrick J. Star said:
You kind of describe my house --- 5/3, 2400 sq ft with formal living room/dining and then the back yard facing portion of the lower level is kitchen (w/island), breakfast nook, and smaller family room in a 'great room' layout --- but not as big as if the entire first floor were open, naturally.  While we would like the living room in particular to be a bit larger and we don't use the formal living room much --- it is nice to have that sanitized formal space off the entry.  For casual guests (like kids parents picking up from a playdate) we can invite them into a nice space for casual chit chat without bringing them into our personal space, which we don't feel as pressed to keep neat for informal visitors.
Click to expand...
Yep.
BUT, having had a formal dining room (which seats up to 10) I would NEVER go back to a having just a great room --- we had that in our previous home, although it was not so great.  The separate formal dining room is amazing if you are into entertaining family or friends.
Click to expand...
Double Yep.
We also have a downstairs bedroom and full bath + four more up --- and all very good sized, bigger than we typically see in new homes.  I don't know why they could fit all this into 2400 sq ft in 1997, but can't in 2012. 
Click to expand...
Hat Trick!

What I've been saying all this time... my old 3CWG was 2405sft and it fit all that AND vaulted ceilings. Yes... bigger/wider footprint (which naturally a 3CWG creates), but even in narrower ones... you should still be able to put all this living space in considering you are removing the vaulted space.
Click to expand...
 
irvinehomeshopper said:
Why would a builder builds a 200 sf vaulted space when he could floor over that for $800 and turn it into $63,000 profit.
Click to expand...
I understand that... especially with the narrower footprints... but why can't they give you as much living space if they are using up that vaulted ceiling area.

For any of those home that were built in the 90s, depending on the roofline, you can add a second floor loft or bedrooms and make it a 3000sft home. They don't count vaulted space in square footage so why could builders back then fit a 5-piece downstairs (living/dining/family/kitchen/nook) plus a bedroom and 4 bedroom upstairs into 2400sft but can't do it now? Heck... they could do a 5-piece in homes less than 2000sft back in the day... what happened to the space efficiency?
 
For example take this floorplan built in early 2000s in QH, Linden Plan 4:

lindenfloorplan4.gif


No vaulted ceilings but can fit a 5br with a 5-piece downstairs into ~2200sft.

Now compare that to Woodbury's Sonoma Plan 1... over 2300sft but only a 3br home, only a great room downstairs (not even a den/bedroom):

8xiw03.jpg


Sure... the rooms are bigger but there is also so much wasted space in the Sonoma plan.
 
So bang for the buck, new Irvine homes should be worth less then it's 90s counterparts due to inefficiency of space...
 
That's why I'm irritated at TIC... the only good thing going for the new homes is they are new. Other than that, the neighborhoods are denser, the floorplans are not very functional, they've removed living spaces and the add-on costs are more expensive.

I actually think that because the new homes are not as great... it's keeping the resale home values high (water cooler logic!).
 
I am not as eloquent as BK but I will take a stab at it to answer your question. The lot shape has a lot to do with achieving a good and efficient plan. Older projects from the 90s had widers lots where a room was possible being next to the garage. This room usually was the formal living room and the Famly/great room combo was located behind the garage. The narrow lots today could only get an entry hall next to the garage and the bulk of the lot is behind the garage. There is no way to get the formal living, dining and family set up. The developer is pretty much stuck with a one big room space behind the garage. To convince the buyers that this is the way to go is to leverage market research into the equation.

So here you go, narrow and deep lots are extremely inefficient and impossible to get the traditional room varieties. It is also very uninspiring to live in a space that is no different than a double wide trailer.

As I am shopping for a slumlord investment I recently walked into many brand new homes, the greatroom spaces without furnishing, wall texture, flooring enhancements, and accessories have no characters and appear lifeless and institutional. The tiny piece of dirt in the rear yard is only useful for drainage.

I can only imagine at a house warming party what a total embarrassment it would be to tell the guests that there is no tour because there is no more house to show you because you are standing in the only room in the house.

Then I viewed some older vacant houses. The older homes even with bare rooms have so much more character and personalities. It is a richer experience to tour one room then another and intrigued By what is around the corner.


irvinehomeowner said:
irvinehomeshopper said:
Why would a builder builds a 200 sf vaulted space when he could floor over that for $800 and turn it into $63,000 profit.
Click to expand...
I understand that... especially with the narrower footprints... but why can't they give you as much living space if they are using up that vaulted ceiling area.

For any of those home that were built in the 90s, depending on the roofline, you can add a second floor loft or bedrooms and make it a 3000sft home. They don't count vaulted space in square footage so why could builders back then fit a 5-piece downstairs (living/dining/family/kitchen/nook) plus a bedroom and 4 bedroom upstairs into 2400sft but can't do it now? Heck... they could do a 5-piece in homes less than 2000sft back in the day... what happened to the space efficiency?
Click to expand...
 
The devil gave up on that already. The greatest tricks is to fool you in paying gold prices for stucco and living in a double wide great room is a dream come true.
 
Are you kidding? Asking FCBs to remodel is like trying to childproof a home. They can launder $millions through custom but they can't install a latch on a cabinet.


Patrick J. Star said:
irvinehomeowner said:
That's why I'm irritated at TIC... the only good thing going for the new homes is they are new.
Click to expand...

Winner, winner --- chicken dinner.  But here is the beauty of it, in a down economy contractors are cheap --- remodeling is very affordable.  Find an existing home with the functionality you crave --- and then hang all the brand new gadgets and finishes on it to make it all new again.  For us, that took exactly 3 1/2 weeks after closing.  Never, never regret going resale.  And sure, finding the right resale home is more effort --- but hey, this is the single biggest purchase you will ever make, if this is not worth a little effort to shop around, what is? 
Click to expand...
 
irvinehomeshopper said:
I am not as eloquent as BK but I will take a stab at it to answer your question. The lot shape has a lot to do with achieving a good and efficient plan. Older projects from the 90s had widers lots where a room was possible being next to the garage. This room usually was the formal living room and the Famly/great room combo was located behind the garage. The narrow lots today could only get an entry hall next to the garage and the bulk of the lot is behind the garage. There is no way to get the formal living, dining and family set up. The developer is pretty much stuck with a one big room space behind the garage. To convince the buyers that this is the way to go is to leverage market research into the equation.

So here you go, narrow and deep lots are extremely inefficient and impossible to get the traditional room varieties. It is also very uninspiring to live in a space that is no different than a double wide trailer.
Click to expand...
I am aware you know more about this particular subject than I (way more)... but I'm familiar enough with space planning and math to think there are ways to fit in the 5-piece 1st floor within the current narrow behind the garage layout (I've seen it in non-Irvine properties). It's not rocket science... I just don't think TIC is asking their designers/architects to do that because they have some notion that everyone wants the "single room 1st floor layout".

We need the separate spaces because one kid is doing homework, one may be eating, and the big one might be watching his TI NBA Fantasy players on the big screen. And although I don't go pantless in the yard... I'm usually in my not-ready-for-prime-time wear so when someone does visit, I can hide while the Mrs. talks to them in the living room.
I can only imagine at a house warming party what a total embarrassment it would be to tell the guests that there is no tour because there is no more house to show you because you are standing in the only room in the house.
Click to expand...
I would put this is my signature... but I vowed to only sig BK's quotes. :D
 
"I can only imagine at a house warming party what a total embarrassment it would be to tell the guests that there is no tour because there is no more house to show you because you are standing in the only room in the house. "


This is really the best quote I have ever read on Talkirvine!  I was literally LOLing.
 
irvinehomeshopper said:
Are you kidding? Asking FCBs to remodel is like trying to childproof a home. They can launder $millions through custom but they can't install a latch on a cabinet.
Click to expand...

bazinga! ...wait at minute...that was an insult at me...nevermind...
 
rkp said:
irvinehomeshopper said:
Are you kidding? Asking FCBs to remodel is like trying to childproof a home. They can launder $millions through custom but they can't install a latch on a cabinet.
Click to expand...

bazinga! ...wait at minute...that was an insult at me...nevermind...
Click to expand...

It would be an insult to you if I had said not knowing how to install a latch and not knowing how to launder money.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top