End Of McMansions? Does this speak for Atlanta as well? (Druid Hills: subletting, apartments)

[BobKovacs]

Originally Posted by arjay57

I know you're being tongue in cheek but there is data on this. Most of the commuting is from suburb to suburb.

Which only serves to disprove the concept of "the suburbs are going to become vast wastelands and slums, as everyone moves into the city over the coming decades." As the data shows, most people aren't working in the city, so why would they want to live in the city? Now, they may want to re-think which suburbs they live in, so they're closer to the suburbs they work in, but I'm just not seeing the "trend of moving back to the city" being as overwhelming as some folks make it out to be.

[cityrover]

Urbanites want to cram everybody into a 3x3 sqm slums complete with no cars, spotty bus service and panhandlers on every door. they glee at any news that may remotely indicate some decline of suburbia.

yawn. boring. not happening.

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by Somoso

The point remains that for the extra money one pays for the larger, newer homes there is a corresponding expectation of something more unique. (at least as far as I am concerned). Secondly, as mentioned in my previous post, McMansions, because of their higher prices will of course attract more attention in these discussions. Why wouldn't they ? And there is and was also a backlash against condo developments sprouting up so its not as if McMansions have been somehow singled out. Both types of developments would emerge seemingly in a matter of weeks with prefab
assemblages on razed lots with the eventual structure occupying most of the lot (At least in town).

How would you distinguish between what you term a McMansion and other spacious homes? Does it make any difference that one of them was purchased by a family who's spent a couple of decades building their lives and careers, moving up in life, and who've invested their hard-earned earnings in this new house? Does it matter if they raise their family there and all consider it home? If they work there? If they do a great job of taking care of it, paying their taxes, supporting their schools and community, and being good citizens who help make Atlanta the vibrant, booming place that is? Who decides that their house is too big for them, too ostentatious, too boring and cookie cutter? And on what authority are these judgments made?

Originally Posted by BobKovacs

Which only serves to disprove the concept of "the suburbs are going to become vast wastelands and slums, as everyone moves into the city over the coming decades." As the data shows, most people aren't working in the city, so why would they want to live in the city? Now, they may want to re-think which suburbs they live in, so they're closer to the suburbs they work in, but I'm just not seeing the "trend of moving back to the city" being as overwhelming as some folks make it out to be.

Well, I do think there's been an identifiable movement of people back into the city of Atlanta proper. The numbers speak for themselves. But that hardly means the suburbs are doomed.

Most of Atlanta's intown neighborhoods are pretty suburban themselves, for that matter. Nearly all of them were built with the car in mind, and while they are to varying degrees walkable, most are still composed of single family homes that rely on the car for heavy lifting.

So I think we'll see these older intown suburbs increasingly being part of the mix along with the newer areas built in the post WWII era. The newer suburbs are likewise becoming increasingly urban. I see this as a matter of taste and the maturing of a big city, not an "urban vs. suburban" war.

[Somoso]

Originally Posted by arjay57

How would you distinguish between what you term a McMansion and other spacious homes? Does it make any difference that one of them was purchased by a family who's spent a couple of decades building their lives and careers, moving up in life, and who've invested their hard-earned earnings in this new house? Does it matter if they raise their family there and all consider it home? If they work there? If they do a great job of taking care of it, paying their taxes, supporting their schools and community, and being good citizens who help make Atlanta the vibrant, booming place that is? Who decides that their house is too big for them, too ostentatious, too boring and cookie cutter? And on what authority are these judgments made?

Sure it makes a difference if a home has been cultivated and developed over a period of decades (even centuries). This is *precisely* the point I was making earlier to another poster. I bought a 50s ranch with several functional additions, great landscaping, about an acre of land (in town) AND it was much cheaper than one of those hastily assembled "Mcmansions" sitting on a near grass- less lot occupying almost all available lot space. I looked at one of these homes and saw that my bedroom view would be the neighbor's gutter. I also saw how shoddy the construction was and didn't need to think twice. Sorry, I don't need the "instant mansion" to feel at home. You willingly admit that there are "cookie cutter" condos but apparently not cookie cutter houses or McMansions ? Very odd. That would mean that the articles referenced in the very first post of this thread are discussing a phenomenon that doesn't exist !

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by Somoso

You willingly admit that there are "cookie cutter" condos but apparently not cookie cutter houses or McMansions ? Very odd.

Er, I said just the opposite. Of course there's repitition in nearly all forms of housing. It's fashion as well as the economies of scale.

As to shoddy construction, that cuts across all forms of housing, too.

But most people who are interested in springing for an expensive house are, like you, going to be turned off by a pile of junk. So it's sort of self-limiting. Builders who are trying to sell crap to people searching for upscale housing won't be in business very long.

[WilliamM]

Originally Posted by BobKovacs

Which only serves to disprove the concept of "the suburbs are going to become vast wastelands and slums, as everyone moves into the city over the coming decades." As the data shows, most people aren't working in the city, so why would they want to live in the city? Now, they may want to re-think which suburbs they live in, so they're closer to the suburbs they work in, but I'm just not seeing the "trend of moving back to the city" being as overwhelming as some folks make it out to be.

Bob,

I don't know that anyone has claimed the suburbs are going to become "vast wastelands and slums" exactly, but what has been claimed, and is undeniable, is that we are in the middle of a huge realignment (or maybe reaction is a more accurate word), a huge generational change in preferences regarding in-town vs suburban living by people of certain means and classes. No one knows of course - or no one claims to know that I'm aware of - just what is going to happen to the suburbs as a whole. That's kind of the 64k question and it's partly what this thread was about, as prompted by the articles referenced.

Looking at the case of some Cobb county suburbs by way of example, if I were a betting man, while I sure wouldn't bet against the staying power of affluence along the Johnson Ferry corridor near Indian Hills in East Cobb, as you move West towards the interstate that's a horse of a different color. Property values are almost certain to continue plummeting in certain areas, and it's just a fact, at some point the desirability of the close-in zip codes starts to have a perverse effect on property values in areas that were once desirable for being outside the core but now find themselves in a suburban no-man's land, not far enough in to be desirable to the young urbanites, but not able to offer the amenities that ensure that they can stay competitive.

[KevK]

Originally Posted by MisterNY

Pretty good articles. I am curious, does anyone think this speaks for Atlanta too? Will we be seeing this trend in Atlanta? The first article speaks mainly about Texas, and other areas. The second article does mention parts of the metro area. I'm asking about opinions; how you feel about the new "trend", or "soup du jour" as they say.

Are we going to see this trend happening in Atlanta in the near future? Mind you the word trend is not loosely thrown in the conversation. Trends are just that, trends. Are we really done with them for good, or not ?
I know there are plenty of big homes in the metro area, so there's plenty to go around for those who want them. Some prefer space and size over convenience and location to town. There's also the issue of excess inventory in Atlanta at the moment.

Death of the 'McMansion': Era of Huge Homes Is Over - Yahoo! Finance (http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Death-of-the-McMansion-Era-of-cnbc-1051033821.html?x=0 - broken link)

The swelling McMansion backlash - MSN Real Estate

The article below is not too pleasing, as to what may happen to some subdivisions in the 'burbs'. Not looking too good if you ask me. What's your say in the matter? Should they be even be destroyed/replaced as stated in the article?

The Next Slum? - Magazine - The Atlantic

The articles are basically all in agreement. Different examples.

They're not long, so read them and let's discuss them.

Please let's leave race out of it, for once. Just good ole' logic and opinions, please.

I hope to God it is over. It is just plain stupid seeing a huge 4 story house towering over the rest of the neighbourhood. I saw one that is 6 floors and has an elevator in it and it was in the middle of a block of 1 and 2 story bungalow style houses.

[bdawk]

Originally Posted by Somoso

You can't blame people for observing that many of these larger homes look similar to others. The point is that if you are laying out the extra money you should at least be getting something unique.

This only works if YOU are the one laying out the money. When it is someone else, they will spend what they earned on what they want.

[KevK]

Originally Posted by cityrover

Urbanites want to cram everybody into a 3x3 sqm slums complete with no cars, spotty bus service and panhandlers on every door. they glee at any news that may remotely indicate some decline of suburbia.

yawn. boring. not happening.

Suburbs are fine. Exurbs are dying a horrible death however.

[WilliamM]

Originally Posted by KevK

I hope to God it is over. It is just plain stupid seeing a huge 4 story house towering over the rest of the neighbourhood. I saw one that is 6 floors and has an elevator in it and it was in the middle of a block of 1 and 2 story bungalow style houses.

Let's hear it for zoning.