I am out of town this week on business, but this post still resonates today. I'll be back next Friday.
Originally posted on August 29th, 2014. by Rod Sager
The trends in home building for middle income buyers has been larger homes on small lots. Builders have been stuffing 2200 square foot homes onto 4000 square foot lots. There is a wow factor when a prospective buyer walks into a brand new house with 2200 square feet of space and all the nice modern features.
The trade-off has been in the "real estate" portion of the deal. These gorgeous big houses had nearly no yard and a tiny so called two car garage. For the very same money a buyer could look at a 20 year old home with 1800 square feet sitting on a large 10,000 square foot lot. Sure, that house was a more dated design, but often the seller had done updates to improve the feel of the home.
So buyers that find themselves in the local market with a $250,000-$300,000 budget will face the same dilemma. 'new on small' or 'old on big'? That trend of new on small even pushed it's way into the bottom of the upper income homes. There are a great many 3500 square foot homes stuffed onto 5000 foot lots here in Clark County as well. Some of these are top quality builders cramming luxury homes onto postage stamp lots up on Camas' Prune Hill.
Buyers should consider that land is valuable. It is a major part of the real estate equation. Having a large, safe yard for children or grandchildren to play in can be most valuable. Summer parties in a real backyard are hard to beat as well. Buyers are well advised to look at a range of homes from new on small to old on big before making that final decision. There are strong merits to both concepts. personally I am at a point in my life where a big house on a small lot would be just dandy! One should just make sure they are choosing the property that will serve them best rather then the property that offers more bling.