Why are Rochester landowners so proud of their dirt?

[Camden Northsider]

Originally Posted by kazinfl

I'm also guessing most of the families which came from smaller midwestern cities have to be from the Dakotas and Iowa. No disrespect to those places, but who else would be happy living in an area where there isn't a tree to be found?

Funny you mention that- I'm from SD as is my sibling that lives in Rochester, and a number of their friends that have moved there- you might be onto something with the trees theory!

There's also a small town phenomenon (at least in MN/South Dakota, not sure how relative this is to small towns in other areas of the country) that I've always been fascinated by- the newly built home, regardless of how ugly/poorly designed, carries a certain status symbol with it. Driving down some main streets of old small towns, it amazes me why anyone would build new when they have well-maintained old victorian and craftsman masterpieces lining their main streets that can be gotten at virtually pennies comparative to the many hundreds of thousands (if not more) they would go for in a desirable big city neighborhood. But I guess the desire to build new in small towns kind of makes sense as (a) there may not be any homes for sale in a town at a given time (or very few); (b) building a home represents growing a small community; and (c) anyone can afford to purchase an older home in a small town with low real estate values, but if you have resources to actually build a new home, then you've "made it" I suppose.

I agree with Bill Wallace on the neighborhood surrounding St. Mary's- beautiful old neighborhood filled with beautiful homes if you can find something that's a fit for you. I don't know a whole lot about other areas off DT that have old homes with character, but I think you're assessment is right that the majority of the town is "newer" thus causing it to not have a ton of pre-1950s housing stock compared to other similarly-situated cities, so it might be harder to find something with all of the amenities you're looking for already built into the home that's not on a smaller lot. When I was checking the MLS several months back, it did seem like I was running across a few 50s-60s built homes in the SW region of town that, although not having the older home (victorian or arts/crafts) character, were pretty attractive, well-designed midcentury homes on larger lots with trees.

And there are some new (probably tree-less) developments that are better than others in terms of the home's appearance and what looks to be better quality of construction, which I'm sure you're already aware of and might be why you are running into higher lot prices. I'm forgetting the name of the neighborhood, but I did used to like a new development in the SW stretch of town that was next to a quarry (or lake?) we would ocassionally fish at- not sure of the name, but possibly Mayowood Hills or somewhere close by that area?

Good luck with your decision/move!

[sholomar]

it's all about supply and demand.... get a few good paying businesses and any sort of a housing shortage and prices are quickly driven up to compensate for the wages. Economy in the midwest is better then the east coast. I'd rather live in NC though personally.

This town has overpriced houses, and people willing to live at their place of work.. combine those 2 and can't really find a house under 100k... old house prices and new construction prices are very close to being the same because of this. However lots here are not bad, it's the houses themselves that are pricy.

When I left Ozaukee County WI back 5 years ago, lots in certain towns were above 100k just for the lot. The Grafton, Cederburg, and Mequon area is very high demand. My father's lucky to have a house paid off in Grafton. Nice area. Built a Costco right in Grafton, the first one in WI, a couple years after I left too.

http://maps.google.com/?q=262-204-1050