Boston vs. Wellesley (should we move to the suburbs?) (Brookline: condo, townhouse)

[MikePRU]

Originally Posted by Parsec

CC Times doesn't archive their stories:
Color scheme in Chatham spurs outcry - News - capecodtimes.com - Hyannis, MA

That's pretty funny. It definitely sounds like both parties could have behaved better in this process.

Originally Posted by Parsec

Thanks for the explanation. Even if you have a 10k sf lot in a SR10 zone, it might not even be worth building a 3600sf new construction home on it. I just looked up SFH for sale in Wellesley and found that only 10 out of 46 SFH for sale in Wellesley are under 3600 sf. I didn't realize most homes are so large there. It's also possible the sample of homes for sale at the moment is not representative of the total population of homes in town because super large homes tend to sit on the market through the winter.

A lot of the houses on the market right now are properties that are over priced. So, it's hard to say that the listings on the market right now are a representative cross section of the housing stock in Wellesley.

This being said . . . if a developer is building a house on spec the numbers do have to add up right. Fortunately or unfortunately (depending on which side of the argument your on) the numbers seem to add up best to maximize profit when you build the biggest house possible on the lot. Building a house that's smaller than the maximum allowed is fine for someone building a house for their family but it just doesn't make sense for someone looking to make a profit. Most new houses are around 4K sq ft on the first two floors and most of them either have a finished 3rd floor or basement. Most real estate agents will list the house with the total square footage which means most of the new houses are listed as having at least 5k sq ft.

[3cents]

Originally Posted by Parsec

I just looked up SFH for sale in Wellesley and found that only 10 out of 46 SFH for sale in Wellesley are under 3600 sf. I didn't realize most homes are so large there. It's also possible the sample of homes for sale at the moment is not representative of the total population of homes in town because super large homes tend to sit on the market through the winter.

I looked at the 'pending' SFH and counted 23 out of 47. Combined with your figures, that's still just 1/3: 33 out of 93 houses. Are houses just big in general in Wellesley?

[MikePRU]

Originally Posted by 3cents

I looked at the 'pending' SFH and counted 23 out of 47. Combined with your figures, that's still just 1/3: 33 out of 93 houses. Are houses just big in general in Wellesley?

In the last 12 months, 318 single family homes have sold in Wellesley through MLS. The average living area of the houses is about 3,500 sq ft. Keep in mind that's the average of all sold houses. 43 of those homes were new construction and the average living area for those houses was about 5,400 sq ft.

Conversely, here in Needham we had 48 new construction homes sell in the same timeframe through MLS. The average living area of those houses was 4,700 sq ft. As the building code here is more liberal and allows building on more lots that are smaller in size, there are more new houses that are slightly smaller in size because the lots themselves are smaller.

[dravogadro]

Originally Posted by Parsec

Why would anyone drive to Alewife from the suburbs on the weekend? $7 to park at Alewife and $5 round trip into the city, or just drive into the city and park for $10-12? Driving is the same price and it's quicker. On weekdays I prefer public transportation, but not on the weekend.

Just a different perspective. Because I commute into the city on transit, I have a T pass, so that helps with the cost. I prefer to never drive in the city. If I was going to an event, I prefer to avoid the after-event traffic. I may plan to eat breakfast in Cambridge, walk around downtown, get a snack in the North End, and maybe head to Back Bay for dinner. I just prefer to not have to worry about where the car is in the city.

Also, no one can drive in the city so I'll take my chances in the parking garage.

[Stret]

Originally Posted by MikePRU

Fortunately or unfortunately (depending on which side of the argument your on) the numbers seem to add up best to maximize profit when you build the biggest house possible on the lot. Building a house that's smaller than the maximum allowed is fine for someone building a house for their family but it just doesn't make sense for someone looking to make a profit. Most new houses are around 4K sq ft on the first two floors and most of them either have a finished 3rd floor or basement. Most real estate agents will list the house with the total square footage which means most of the new houses are listed as having at least 5k sq ft.

This is a good argument for the applicable towns that care at all about overbuilding or their housing stock to update their zoning laws.

This thread is also a good example of people that will happily buy smaller homes in these towns expensive towns, and the teardowns for profit aren't really necessary most of the time. The homes will generally sell.

[MikePRU]

Originally Posted by Stret

This is a good argument for the applicable towns that care at all about overbuilding or their housing stock to update their zoning laws.

This thread is also a good example of people that will happily buy smaller homes in these towns expensive towns, and the teardowns for profit aren't really necessary most of the time. The homes will generally sell.

The smaller homes would definitely sell. That's not a question. The question is - who is going to build them because there's not enough money in it.

[brightdoglover]

I think the previous post to Mike's was referring to pre-existing smaller houses that are bring torn down- that they are perfectly livable houses, but are being torn down for more profitable bigger new houses.

[traffic_lover]

I was in your almost exact situation: owned tiny condo in North end, got engaged, decided to sell & move to suburbs. Not a day passes by that I don't regret that decision. Buy a 2 bed condo in city, stay 5-10 yrs till you have kid (s), then rent out condo & move to burbs.

[MikePRU]

Originally Posted by brightdoglover

I think the previous post to Mike's was referring to pre-existing smaller houses that are bring torn down- that they are perfectly livable houses, but are being torn down for more profitable bigger new houses.

Parsec was talking about building smaller houses, but reading Stret's post again I could see how they might have been talking about the pre-existing, smaller home.

[Stret]

Originally Posted by brightdoglover

I think the previous post to Mike's was referring to pre-existing smaller houses that are bring torn down- that they are perfectly livable houses, but are being torn down for more profitable bigger new houses.

The smaller preexisting homes in towns like Wellesley don't normally need to be torn down. The OP of this thread shows that there are people willing buy small homes that need work in expensive towns. The teardowns are not really a necessity, there are buyers for the homes as they are since the towns are desirable enough.