McMansions into Multi-Family Housing

[dbarberic]

Another iTulip First. As written in 1995 by EJ.

Step F: Ten years into the downturn, real estate will be widely regarded as a terrible, "can't win" investment. McMansions will be subdivided for rental as multi-family homes.
http://www.itulip.com/housingbubblecorrection.htm

New Show Announced on HGTV:

Scott McGillivray helps first-time homebuyers turn part of their home into a moneymaker to help with mortgage. In each episode, Scott presents the homeowners with options and they choose which part of the house to renovate into an apartment. We see the renovation and the amazing reveals.
http://www.hgtv.com/income-property/show/index.html

Instead of granite counter top and stainless steel kitchen remodels, and flip this house episodes, HGTV is pitching renovating parts of your McMansion into rental apartments and showing viewers just how to do it.

[don]

Re: McMansions into Multi-Family Housing

With the all new, all-American corollary of multi-generational same address living

Let's put Grandma in the Home Theater Room :eek:

[flintlock]

Re: McMansions into Multi-Family Housing

That concept is nothing new. Around here( Atlanta) you find old Victorian Mansions from the gilded age long ago converted into multifamily. You'll probably see some of that in the future, but for the most part, there are just way too many homes period. More likely they'll rot where they sit.

[metalman]

Re: McMansions into Multi-Family Housing

With the all new, all-American corollary of multi-generational same address living

Let's put Grandma in the Home Theater Room :eek:

coming to your home soon!



who needs a car?

[GRG55]

Re: McMansions into Multi-Family Housing

That concept is nothing new. Around here( Atlanta) you find old Victorian Mansions from the gilded age long ago converted into multifamily. You'll probably see some of that in the future, but for the most part, there are just way too many homes period. More likely they'll rot where they sit.

Back in the early 1990s, on two of my numerous journeys within the USA, I ended up in Astoria, Oregon and Port Townsend, Washington. Judging by the number of large, elegant Victorian houses both must have been very wealthy towns in their prime. And when the economy declined [they appear to have been displaced by Portland and Seattle, respectively, probably because that's where the railways terminated] these oversize homes were no longer affordable and began to "rot where they sit". Fortunately, just like in Atlanta, there was a growing interest to rescue and restore some of these beauties...conversion to a B&B was a popular strategy. I have not been back since, but sometimes wonder if the housing bubble resulted in more money going into that worthy restoration cause, or if Pacific NW seaside mansions were torn down to make way for McMansions instead.

[santafe2]

Re: McMansions into Multi-Family Housing

Instead of granite counter top and stainless steel kitchen remodels, and flip this house episodes, HGTV is pitching renovating parts of your McMansion into rental apartments and showing viewers just how to do it.

Better than dirt and granite floors I suppose.

reallybadhousing.jpg

[don]

Re: McMansions into Multi-Family Housing

Back in the early 1990s, on two of my numerous journeys within the USA, I ended up in Astoria, Oregon and Port Townsend, Washington. Judging by the number of large, elegant Victorian houses both must have been very wealthy towns in their prime. And when the economy declined [they appear to have been displaced by Portland and Seattle, respectively, probably because that's where the railways terminated] these oversize homes were no longer affordable and began to "rot where they sit". Fortunately, just like in Atlanta, there was a growing interest to rescue and restore some of these beauties...conversion to a B&B was a popular strategy. I have not been back since, but sometimes wonder if the housing bubble resulted in more money going into that worthy restoration cause, or if Pacific NW seaside mansions were torn down to make way for McMansions instead.

Those restorations to B&Bs aren't looking so swell about now. A feel-good endeavor, not a very sound business plan. Couples that poured their nest egg and loans into those found themselves chained to the business as glorified domestics, at the mercy of any tourista downturn. Grim for many.

[Spartacus]

Re: Kunstler's sources wanted this in the 70s and 80s

(edit: I just put this here as a small note if you want to explore some of the antecedents. the move to McMansions is not a new US FIRE economy thing, it's been going on for a long, long time, all over the world. Among those involved are politicians that want "high class" neighborhoods, urban planners who have an ideological hate for high density housing and railroads, and great affection and love for rubber wheels and a huge green yard for every 3 person family. There is, of course, a genuine, not easily criticized desire by people to "do better". Too bad these ideals get reified by the destruction of cheap housing for those who choose the equally-valid path of modest shelter.)

Off the top of my head, one of Kunstler's sources is a woman who wrote in the 60s (I forget the name - Jane something -Jacobs? ) criticizing the post-WWII destruction of high density housing in Boston.

Others of that circle, and many inspired by her have been around for decades, making similar points.

Another iTulip First. As written in 1995 by EJ.



New Show Announced on HGTV:


Instead of granite counter top and stainless steel kitchen remodels, and flip this house episodes, HGTV is pitching renovating parts of your McMansion into rental apartments and showing viewers just how to do it.

[FRED]

Re: Kunstler's sources wanted this in the 70s and 80s

(edit: I just put this here as a small note if you want to explore some of the antecedents. the move to McMansions is not a new US FIRE economy thing, it's been going on for a long, long time, all over the world. Among those involved are politicians that want "high class" neighborhoods, urban planners who have an ideological hate for high density housing and railroads, and great affection and love for rubber wheels and a huge green yard for every 3 person family. There is, of course, a genuine, not easily criticized desire by people to "do better". Too bad these ideals get reified by the destruction of cheap housing for those who choose the equally-valid path of modest shelter.)

Off the top of my head, one of Kunstler's sources is a woman who wrote in the 60s (I forget the name - Jane something -Jacobs? ) criticizing the post-WWII destruction of high density housing in Boston.

Others of that circle, and many inspired by her have been around for decades, making similar points.

The point made here was specifically a post housing bubble forecast. How else are "home owners" going to pay the mortgage without boarders? And a depression provides an abundant supply of under and unemployed in need of cheap rent.

iTulip made a post housing bubble depression forecast. Kunstler, on the other hand, is a Utopian. He had a lousy childhood in the burbs and is taking it out on the rest of us.

Millions of middle class were not eager to return to this after the war.

They went for this, a huge improvement.

Kunstler conveniently forgets the details. Unless you were rich, citites were horrific places to live. That is still true today, but less so.

[bill]

Re: Kunstler's sources wanted this in the 70s and 80s

The point made here was specifically a post housing bubble forecast. How else are "home owners" going to pay the mortgage without boarders? And a depression provides an abundant supply of under and unemployed in need of cheap rent.

iTulip made a post housing bubble depression forecast. Kunstler, on the other hand, is a Utopian. He had a lousy childhood in the burbs and is taking it out on the rest of us.

Millions of middle class were not eager to return to this after the war.

They went for this, a huge improvement.

Kunstler conveniently forgets the details. Unless you were rich, citites were horrific places to live. That is still true today, but less so.

now they mix, pricey and poor
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la...,2640966.story
Special zones urged for people who sleep in RVs, cars in Venice

January 22, 2009

Email Picture

Spencer Weiner / Los Angeles Times

Venice is a popular spot for parked motor homes.

Tough economic times have spilled onto the streets of Venice, which has become a favorite place to park for scores of otherwise homeless people living in cars and campers. The practice has ignited a mini-uprising among residents living in the pricey coastal community.

The number of cars and recreational vehicles has swelled so much over the last year that Councilman Bill Rosendahl, who represents the city's coastal areas, has proposed creating special zones away from neighborhoods where people can sleep in their vehicles.



"The community has been going ballistic," Rosendahl said. "They can't park their own cars. Some of the folks who live in their cars and in campers defecate and urinate outside and create other issues of quality of life and health."

His proposal, similar to programs in Santa Barbara and Eugene, Ore., would allow the cars and recreational vehicles to park in select "municipal properties, parking lots of churches or community-based organizations, industrial areas and other areas that would have minimal impact on residential communities."

Current city laws prohibit sleeping in a car or RV on the street.


"Let's stop kidding ourselves," Rosendahl said. "People are living in their cars. . . . So let's deal with the reality. In this economic downturn, it's even increasing."
.
.
.

[zoog]

Re: Kunstler's sources wanted this in the 70s and 80s

...Off the top of my head, one of Kunstler's sources is a woman who wrote in the 60s (I forget the name - Jane something -Jacobs? ) criticizing the post-WWII destruction of high density housing in Boston.

Others of that circle, and many inspired by her have been around for decades, making similar points.

FYI: Jane Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Cities, among other books.

...Kunstler conveniently forgets the details. Unless you were rich, citites were horrific places to live. That is still true today, but less so.

It's been many years since I read Jane Jacobs, but my recollection is that she also painted a rosy picture of pre-Modernist inner city urban life. Not that there wasn't truth to the sense of community she was contrasting with the sprawling isolation of suburbia, but she only detailed the undesirable aspects of city life in the contemporary time period, placing the blame on unenlightened developers, urban planners, and city governments.

[Spartacus]

I went off on a tangent.
Thanks for bringing it back on target.

The point made here was specifically a post housing bubble forecast. How else are "home owners" going to pay the mortgage without boarders? And a depression provides an abundant supply of under and unemployed in need of cheap rent.

iTulip made a post housing bubble depression forecast. Kunstler, on the other hand, is a Utopian. He had a lousy childhood in the burbs and is taking it out on the rest of us.

We agree on a lot[*] .

Millions of middle class were not eager to return to this after the war.
They went for this, a huge improvement.

is a little like my " a genuine, not easily criticized desire by people to "do better"."

Kunstler has no hesitation in insulting the burbs, which I don't do. Where I agree with Jacobs is about the forced removal of lots of people to make way for low - density housing. If I remember correctly, in the Boston situation specifically lots of people were forcibly removed.

[*] I don't know about K's childhood, though

[Shakespear]

Re: McMansions into Multi-Family Housing

I lived in Milwaukee, inner city when I was in grade school. The house was two story, we lived downstairs another family upstairs. All was fine.

Now someone explain to me why the heck 20 years later suddenly a family of three needs a home with 5 rooms, living room, kitchen and a garage for 3 autos.

I realize it was a gradual process just like that frog in a pot that's heating up on the stove.

[GRG55]

Re: McMansions into Multi-Family Housing

I went off on a tangent.
Thanks for bringing it back on target.



We agree on a lot[*] .


is a little like my " a genuine, not easily criticized desire by people to "do better"."

Kunstler has no hesitation in insulting the burbs, which I don't do. Where I agree with Jacobs is about the forced removal of lots of people to make way for low - density housing. If I remember correctly, in the Boston situation specifically lots of people were forcibly removed.
[*] I don't know about K's childhood, though

Spartacus: You may wish to read some of the works of the late Lewis Mumford, architecture and urban planning critic, if this topic is of interest. You'll find them refreshing compared to the latter day ranting of the likes of Kunstler.

The razing of inner city neighbourhoods was as often as not driven by routing freeways into the city centres, not because of some hate-on for high density housing. Poor neighbourhoods have the least political influence with the property interests that populate civic politics, and therefore were the most at risk from the wrecking ball in the interests of "progress".

Nevertheless, I find the unbridled criticism of the suburbs a bit perplexing. Every city I have lived in, and all that I am familiar with, have significantly increased the density of residents in their core and surrounding area since WWII, at the same time the suburban sprawl expanded. I don't believe this is an "either-or" matter.

As an example, in my hometown of Vancouver, B.C. the West End [next to downtown] was, as recently as the 1950's, predominantly single family houses combined with pre-WWII low-rise apartment blocks strung along the roads that [used to] have electric street trolleys; low-rise because apartment blocks didn't have elevators when these were built. By the '60's the homes were being converted to rentals and those on the outer perimeter, nearest the water, were being torn down and replaced by high rise apartments. That densification extended into the adjacent former commercial and warehouse district in the 1980's. And through all that Vancouver experienced at least three major condo booms and busts, including the bust now underway, and the inner city population increased steadily. Toronto is one of the few North American cities I have managed to largely avoid, but I imagine its experience was similar?

[we_are_toast]

Re: Kunstler's sources wanted this in the 70s and 80s

t.

iTulip made a post housing bubble depression forecast. Kunstler, on the other hand, is a Utopian. He had a lousy childhood in the burbs and is taking it out on the rest of us.
...

Kunstler conveniently forgets the details. Unless you were rich, citites were horrific places to live. That is still true today, but less so.

A bit harsh on Mr. Kunstler. Don't forget that famous iTulip respect for others.

I think you are misrepresenting Mr. Kunstler's view. Mr. Kunstler feels strongly that we are approaching Peak Production Oil. Please explain how you can maintain a sprawling, resource intensive, suburban lifestyle, with a growing population and nowhere near enough national raw materials, while world wide resources rapidly decline? It's simply not possible.

The burbs are going to die. There are not enough natural resources in the world, and the world demand will grow far too fast, to support this uniquely American wasteful lifestyle.

Your psychoanalysis of Mr. Kunstler, is a little unfair.