Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I personally think most new builds are junk with terrible architecture and postage stamp lots and tiny stick trees and bad locations. It isn't hard to accomodate work from home setups in a lot of renovated 60 year old ranches. The million dollar new builds in Frisco and Prosper are much more confusing to me.
Thoughts/Devils advocates stuff:
1. Economics, ecology and logic drive the move to more and more relatively smaller lots. FWIIW I don't like the look either.
2. One of my brothers is an architect in Austin. I've heard him give the speech many times......."virtually every important aspect of current homes is better than 20 and 40 years go - roofing, flooring systems, beams, insulation, plumbing, HVAC, water heating and most especially electrical."
Me talking.....
An HVAC caveat......literally everything about current HVAC systems is better than in the past with one big exception. Government efficiency mandates have forced the industry to use thinner and thinner heat exchanging surfaces (coils/manifolds etc.). The thinner surfaces do indeed exchange heat more efficiently. Sadly, the same are much more prone to leaks and rupture than the same material in thicker/heavier form.
FWIIW I've done a fair bit of oil field and industrial electrical work in the past.
Residential electrical is night and day better/safer. Proper hot, neutral, ground (with ground running directly back to the neutral bar in the panel) with GFCI and/or Arc Fault protection with modern grounding schemes is orders of magnitude safer than older hot, neutral and no ground or hot, neutral and "grounded" receptacle boxes (per the later wiring was insufficient to stave off fire from equipment or receptacle shorts - IOW at the plugs these things test perfect but are in reality dangerous - there are thousands of homes in Dallas and Fort Worth wired like this). I'll leave aluminum wire and pig-tails and sub-standard electrical panels for another time. Further, The National Electrical Code people encourage those with hot and neutral only wiring (often but not always seen via two-prong receptacles) to install GFCIs at the first receptacle on most circuits - all this gets complex fast but the yield is in these arrangements GFCIs will quite well protect people from being shocked but offer zero equipment grounding IOW there is still an increased chance of fire as such must labeled, "No Equipment Ground".....I've never seen such tabled correctly.
An example....my son bought 45yo home in Dallas a few years ago. That place had all of totally ungrounded hot and neutral circuits some with hot neutral and grounded plugs (obviously the ground plug was useless), two circuits of hot, neutral and metal "grounded" receptacle boxes, a GFCI in the kitchen along a hot and neutral only circuit A. set in the last receptacle position not the first - ergo it only worked though that plug not the others closer to the power source B. it was not marked as, "No Equipment Ground." Some of the wiring was copper some aluminum with pig tails.....every single pig tail showed signs of heat degradation.
Three bits fell into freakishly dangerous areas:
1. There was no, "bonding bolt" (usually green) in the panel and the panel was not grounded to local Earth......there was no connection to a grounding rod for all we know there was no grounding rod.
2. Many wiring connections were simply twisted together....no wire nuts, no Euro style clamp connectors just well twisted wire.
3. Four light switches were wired in what I call, "neutral break" fashion.......flipping the switch killed the light by breaking neutral not hot ergo the fixture was hot even when the light/fan was "off." That's freakishly dangerous, violates NEC and every local code everywhere in The US anyway.
Literally none of the above would pass current building inspection. I must add it did pass a home inspection. They inspector's only note per electrical was about the green bonding screw/bolt.
I spent four days with an electrician and then drywall and paint guys making the place safer before sonny moved in......we drove a 12ft. grounding rod for the panel and four separate local grounding rods as there was no good/reasonable way to run ground back to the panel from some circuits. Believe it or not there is actually NEC guidance about when local/secondary grounding is appropriate and how to do it (rod, rod length, where to install GFCI or Arc-Fault and lots of info about ground loop issues) and why doing so is inferior to grounding back to the panel but almost infinitely better than nothing.
Complex/multi-segmented roofs are stronger per snow and especially around here wind than more monolithic types. They show warpage less and are visually less dominant. We just sold it but our home in Dallas was a ~60yo largish ranch - it sucks but from the road the most eye-catching feature was the monolithic roof and gutter.
Foundations......modern PT slabs are vastly better than older slab on grade, earlier PT slabs and most builder grade pier and beam foundations of yore.
One of my brothers is an architect in Austin. I've heard him give the speech many times......."virtually every important aspect of current homes is better than 20 and 40 years go - roofing, flooring systems, beams, insulation, plumbing, HVAC, water heating and most especially electrical."
This is Dallas, almost every home gets its roof replaced every 5-10 years through home insurance sponsored by frequent hailing, thunderstorms and tornadoes. Most 25+ year old homes (specially in million+ range) have had their HVAC, water heaters, flooring, etc replaced. Almost every old house have had foundation issues resolved if there were any. Most have had inspections and upgrades and renovations by every new owner.
If there are existing issues, price would reflect that or you can ask for price adjustment. Every house has its pros and cons, no matter new or old.
I still find it surprising how some buyers with budget this high look past common fears and myths while some keep driving.
This is Dallas, almost every home gets its roof replaced every 5-10 years through home insurance sponsored by frequent hailing, thunderstorms and tornadoes. Most 25+ year old homes (specially in million+ range) have had their HVAC, water heaters, flooring, etc replaced. Almost every old house have had foundation issues resolved if there were any. Most have had inspections and upgrades and renovations by every new owner.
If there are existing issues, price would reflect that or you can ask for price adjustment. Every house has its pros and cons, no matter new or old.
I still find it surprising how some buyers with budget this high look past common fears and myths while some keep driving.
I was born here. I know this is Dallas.
I'm not really sure what your point is but per older homes things like ungrounded GFCI protected circuits, mis-wired light switches and missing ground rods are not myths. Further, if home inspectors miss these things how's the gen-pop supposed to know better? Further, how will price reflect issues that are unknown, under-appreciated or lied about?
In 2010 my realtor, not my home inspector, noticed that the home we were looking at, and really liked, had modern asphalt shingles laid over cedar shakes and that I needed to call my insurance company........sure enough at the time State Farm wouldn't cover the house under any circumstances. What was really going on is the owner and his relator knew they had a disclosable issue and tried to lie their way past it.
Most everyone agrees large lots look better than small identically shaped ones. But they cost more and what share of buyers can or want more lot than home? Zoning drives toward aesthetics or bigger lots. Living in the NE zoning seem to result in stagnant neighborhoods where the status quo lasted longer as new buyers generally could not afford those close in mature desirable areas, so demographics for areas changed slower it seems. Intentional?
Why buyers are still interested in 20-40 year old >million$ homes in Plano, Richardson and Coppell? One would think work from home changed priorities for buyers.
Is Richardson really still a premium location on par with Coppell and Plano? I've had loads of coworkers living in Frisco, Prosper and McKinney and I have yet to meet one that would swap their current home for the same home in Richardson even if it resulted in a shorter commute to work. Note that I'm not the one saying that Richardson is mediocre, but the consensus I see anecdotally is that it's not considered top tier, not anymore. This ain't the 90s.
Is Richardson really still a premium location on par with Coppell and Plano? I've had loads of coworkers living in Frisco, Prosper and McKinney and I have yet to meet one that would swap their current home for the same home in Richardson even if it resulted in a shorter commute to work. Note that I'm not the one saying that Richardson is mediocre, but the consensus I see anecdotally is that it's not considered top tier, not anymore. This ain't the 90s.
Richardson is less uniform than Coppell for sure, but as long as you are talking JJ Pearce zone, it’s probably more expensive per square foot than the majority of Plano or Coppell.
2. One of my brothers is an architect in Austin. I've heard him give the speech many times......."virtually every important aspect of current homes is better than 20 and 40 years go - roofing, flooring systems, beams, insulation, plumbing, HVAC, water heating and most especially electrical."
Can you ask your brother why they have stopped putting high vaulted ceilings on small one story houses and why they have made master bathrooms smaller?
Also, ask why the new houses now one big rectangle with a kitchen island plopped in the middle?
Can they not think of anything different? There are no corners or angles to give it any visual interest.
Also where did the idea for the short, wide skinny rectangular windows come from? It makes no sense. is that some new trend?
Quote:
Originally Posted by biafra4life
Is Richardson really still a premium location on par with Coppell and Plano? I've had loads of coworkers living in Frisco, Prosper and McKinney and I have yet to meet one that would swap their current home for the same home in Richardson even if it resulted in a shorter commute to work. Note that I'm not the one saying that Richardson is mediocre, but the consensus I see anecdotally is that it's not considered top tier, not anymore. This ain't the 90s.
That's funny. I was asking the same thing about McKinney. However, I would take McKinney over Richardson any day. It also seems like a lot of employers moved from Richardson to Plano and other cities over the past 10-20 years. Forget the 90s. Much of Richardson screams 1960s.
There's a big difference between the style of a house that's 30 years old and one that's 50 years old.
As to the point of the thread, we're talking about millionaires. They don't care if it's new. If they want new, they can always tear down the old house and build new. In addition, many people of all incomes do not work from home and may not spend a lot of time at home.
I'm not that wealthy, but I could afford a new house and choose to stay in my old one because architects have come up with such horrific designs these days, and too many builders and cities seem to think busy thoroughfares with little to no buffer are acceptable for residential construction.
Can you ask your brother why they have stopped putting high vaulted ceilings on small one story houses and why they have made master bathrooms smaller?
Also, ask why the new houses now one big rectangle with a kitchen island plopped in the middle?
Can they not think of anything different? There are no corners or angles to give it any visual interest.
Also where did the idea for the short, wide skinny rectangular windows come from? It makes no sense. is that some new trend?
No. But I'll answer for him and be close to what he would say.
1. Small one story homes are built to price points. Given that high vaulted ceilings yield higher AC and heating bills and cost more assuming standard construction techniques. High vaulted ceiling can be built with very high R-values using SIP panels but that adds expense that violates the price point angle. Same bit per bathroom size.
2. To whatever degree that's true it's so because lots are usually rectangular or close and rooms are virtually always rectangular. So home shapes will be rectangular generally. Further, back to price points excepting circles the closer to square shaped a home is the less the outside running dimensions per cubic foot of space. Ergo squares and squarish rectangles simply make sense from a cost perspective.
2.1. Front doors opening into something like foyers with kitchens and a living spaces right goes back to Pagan/Danish dining halls and the dark ages at least. You'd have to ask them.
3. I have no thoughts on short and wide windows. I may ask him about that.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
