There is another cause of overcrowding and homelessness. It is mansionization, the demolition of older, smaller, less expensive houses by real estate speculators who quickly replace them with spec McMansions: boxy, shoddily built houses that max out the permitted building envelope. — City Watch LA
The disincentive to build multifamily and affordable housing is made worse by the popularity of these easily repeatable home designs, which also cost more to construct while taking up more space and using more water and electricity. Certain communities around L.A. County have developed effective anti-McMansion ordinances that work by limiting the size of structures, although loopholes abound.
A possible solution can be taken from LA's 35 existing community plans, which contain some version of language to “protect existing stable single-family and low-density residential neighborhoods from encroachment by higher density residential uses and other uses that are incompatible as to scale, character, or would otherwise diminish quality of life.”
11 Comments
Owners of these types of houses don't give a fuck about housing crises or any other crisis related to it as long as they have their beige granite flooring on sale installed and their bathroom tiles are accented by the owner designers!!
not just owners of these houses, I see a lot of people not giving a fuck about others lately.
Agreed. Let's just stay on the houses for a change. Merry Xmas.
I'm going to disagree, Orhan. Most owners of these types of houses just want a damn place to live, but it's the only thing available.
We both know the Denver area so I'll use that as an example - if your budget is $400k to $600k, you can hardly buy a tear-down West of Colorado boulevard, but there's plenty of new construction available in Castle Rock or near the Airport. What is that new construction composed of? Not 2000sf efficient starter homes in walkable neighborhoods, but these 4000+sf behemoths in typical soulless suburban tracts. It's what the developers are building because it's what the banks will finance because it's what sells. It sells because it's what gets built. Vicious cycle.
Indeed a vicious cycle archanonymous! Such a crucial impact on the built environment is left to bankers. I live in a dense urban neighborhood and one of these things is as depressing and on your face. They don't bring any redeeming quality to the urban environment whatsoever. Since they are built cheaply, they decay faster than any other building and become eyesores.
People say it's a free country but it shouldn't be at the cost of my or my neighbors' quality of life. So the ordinances like many other zoning regulations are necessary.
Agreed - I think the Denver area has been less troubled by the specific phenomenon the article is talking about, but even then I've seen some of the dense pre-war and early post-war suburbs immediately surrounding the historic core of Denver blighted with these mcmansions inserted into neighborhoods of otherwise lovely, well-scaled SFRs.
Whether a "true" McMansion or not, definitely seen more than one old home torn down with a new Denver Fugly maxing out the lot, in my neck of the woods.
Its a free market, why should someone not be able to built whatever they like? are they doing anything illegal? Some folks prefer to live in single family neighborhoods.
Nobody is saying they can't but if you want to live in a single-family neighborhood, go with a similar envelope that keeps up with the character of the neighborhood. Learn to watch your carbon footprint, if not for yourself but for your children. I am for anti-Mc Mansion ordinances.
What if the existing character of the neighborhood is not in par with what you like? or what if there is no existing character?
Let's analyze lines of responsibiity. Quoting Citywatch LA:
spec McMansions: boxy,
Talent crisis: too many licensed architects suffering from LOFT (lack of f---ing talent) and clueless clients who watch "real housewives". Does this get corrected at the university or the licensing portal? There are at least two well known firms already developing real estate, more need to follow this business direction.
shoddily built houses
Adminstrative: Building codes need to require WELL built houses; Florida improved its codes after 1992- hurricane Andrew- and every year a few hurricanes thin the herd.
that max out the permitted building envelope
Administrative: ZONING codes need to better address the permitted living envelope, not by denying the rich their due, but by protecting neighbors from their lack of control . This is an administrative proposal, maybe by prorating fees for those insisting on building eyesores. For instance, if a 3000 sf house generates an impact fee of $10,000- Miami charges $12,000 per unit- maybe a 12,000 sf house generates a fee of over $100,000 plus a mature shade tree for every 20' of (public right of way) street frontage. This way, the very opulent get to be as tacky as they can afford AND socially responsible.
Unfortunately, appraisers, realtors, and bankers only consider location and square feet when valuing property, and THEY determine what gets built. The day quality gets added to the mix will be the day McMansions get torn down in favor of real architecture.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.