patrick.net

If you don't mind paying more for less. Most new homes are built with subpar materials and are prepped to fail as soon as the builder warranty ends.

We built in 2004/05. Raw land equidistant from my job and my wife's, which meant an hour commute for each of us. At the time it was a sensible choice (we felt) as we had lived in the area for 10 years and all our friends were there.
We were very conservative and built a 1 bedroom 1 bath (hired a good architect and got a wonderful design...) -- our thinking was that we didn't need more, and we didn't want to build something that needed two salaries to pay for. We don't have kids and are past the point where we might have them.
As soon as we signed the papers and broke ground, her company laid everyone off and closed shop. My job remains stable, however.
After 4 years there, and some retraining for her, she found work in the same direction as my job as a contractor. She travels everyday to a different place, at least 1 hour each way. Eventually we decided living in the house would not work, as there was simply not enough time left in the day or energy in our bodies after work and commuting to enjoy the house. So, we moved out and now live closer to our jobs. As everyone knows, the market has since tanked and the market price for our house is less than half of what it cost to improve the land and build the house. I don't think we will live long enough to recoup our investment. The house is rented, by the way, although it doesn't quite cover the mortgage.
I enjoyed many aspects of designing and building the house (we had a great architect and contractor) but even with a fine team you will have times when you kick yourself for ever having decided to do such a stupid thing as build a house. And we came in under budget!
One thing to consider about building something that is perfect for you -- it will not be very marketable. The market wants 3/2 with a 2 car garage. Period. Anything else appeals to a much smaller segment, and the more idiosyncratic the design the fewer people who will be interested. You MUST seriously factor in the aggregate statistics on houses and how americans use them (we tend to move every 7 years or something like that). It means that no matter how we feel about it, we are highly unlikely to live until we die in the house we currently live in. So, build something more marketable. If you don't put in a dishwasher, at least make sure there is plumbing for it and space under the counter. If you think you don't need a shower (and that you'll put in a outdoor tub later once construction is finished -- as we thought and never did) consider that that is extremely unusual in houses in the resale market. If you have thought of all that and still like the idea, consider that when you do eventually have to move, and cannot sell the house, you will be a landlord. If you have never done that, ask people who have what it is like. I personally would rather get a root canal than be a landlord, and am constantly trying to convince my wife that we should just send back the keys to the bank.

The cost of engineering and utilities for the sloping lot can be very expensive. Get this firmly set up before buying the lot.

As per the previous post, build a marketable house. You just don't know what will happen in the future.

Two options to consider other than traditional contractor stick built house.

1. Move an existing house onto the lot.Usually you can pick up a house that's pretty close to what you want and remodel it to the way you want it for a lot less than building. I'm doing this as we type with a historic home. Even with new plumbing and electric I couldn't come any where close on price if I were looking to buy an equivalent house. Look under house movers in the yellow pages.

2. Prefab. Not a trailer, a house build in parts and assembled on sight. Don't let the negative image of prefabs turn you off. There are a lot of good prefab builders. The advantages are big. You have plans that have been built thousands of times so they are proven. A one time design by an architect may or may not be very good. The house sections are built in a factory in jigs, not by guys working in the mud on a job site who may or may not be hung over. Quality control is very good for the reputable companies. Usually you can do mild custumization to the plans. The big outfits have tremendous buying power that a local contractor cant' touch for materials.

Anyway if I were building a new house from the ground up I would go prefab and use a good part of the savings over stick built to upgrade materials and appliances.

bob2356 says

2. Prefab. Not a trailer, a house build in parts and assembled on sight. Don't let the negative image of prefabs turn you off

No first hand experience but I have also heard good things about this from smart people with first hand experience, for all the reasons bob2356 mentions. Don't discard this option out of hand.

Buy a small church, sell the pews, now you've got a big box.
That was my solution, except i'm adding all the fabulous of loft style living.

A note of caution a church isn't a house so financing can be challenging, best to have all cash.

StoutFiles says

If you don't mind paying more for less. Most new homes are built with subpar materials and are prepped to fail as soon as the builder warranty ends.

You're preaching to choir on this one; I am usually the lone voice in the gale when it comes to how superior the materials were that went into house construction 50-100 years ago. They look better and age better, too, so they're even more gratifying to restore than anything I see being built today. This is true of a lot of - if indeed not most - manufactured durables. Bearing this in mind, I wouldn't plan on being hands-off-head-up-the-ass on any aspect of the building process. I wouldn't build something that looked good new but aged like shit.

unstoppable says

fabulous of loft style living

Fabulousness was tongue-in-cheek. In fact, I love the idea of living in what amounts to a glorified dojo, I just dont' want to pay the attendant premium for such a thing having been packaged and marketed to me.

beentheredonethat says

I enjoyed many aspects of designing and building the house (we had a great architect and contractor) but even with a fine team you will have times when you kick yourself for ever having decided to do such a stupid thing as build a house. And we came in under budget!
One thing to consider about building something that is perfect for you -- it will not be very marketable. The market wants 3/2 with a 2 car garage. Period. Anything else appeals to a much smaller segment, and the more idiosyncratic the design the fewer people who will be interested. You MUST seriously factor in the aggregate statistics on houses and how americans use them (we tend to move every 7 years or something like that).

Excellent input here, which echoes many of my own reservations. I know most folks want the 3/2 2 car garage deal -- I drafted a layout where, in a pinch, you could throw up some drywall and voilà -- 3/2 -- or at any rate, 3/1.5. In fact, one of the spaces I have as a media room could easily be a kids room.

One of the the things I want to get away from is moving every couple of years. I know I only have so much control over that, (as much as I do anything, really), but it really hampers me and my work. Also, I have a feeling this will be less of a dynamic for the American middle class going forward. I could be wrong, but I think the opposite assumes a return to ladder buying, which I don't think we'll see as much of for at least a generation or so.

bob2356 says

The cost of engineering and utilities for the sloping lot can be very expensive. Get this firmly set up before buying the lot.

As per the previous post, build a marketable house. You just don't know what will happen in the future.

Excellent points. I am concerned about the sloping lot, especially since it's pretty steep. I'm not even sure it's feasible, (though I've seen some conceptual workarounds to slopes), and even if it is, how much more it would add to the final total. That said, it's significantly cheaper and larger (private) than other lots I was looking at, and more centrally located. In a way, despite being impractical, it's also kinda...badass. It backs to a greenbelt, so whatever you build there would enjoy something of a tree house effect. Of course, in drought prone central Texas, it could also get gobbled up in a wildfire.

RE: prefab -- I have looked into those, and I see no stigma whatsoever. There are some damn fine looking models out there these days. I think financing might be a little tricky, though. If I were to go the prefab route, I think I'd be better off finding a more level lot.

As for future shock, this does figure into my own reservations. However, lately, I feel as though perhaps I hedge just a little too much. I'm also not sure how uncertain future pitfalls figure any more or less into buying a pre-existing shack.

BTW - if I could find a house worth moving, I would certainly go that route.

Austinhousingbubble says

unstoppable says

Buy a small church, sell the pews, now you've got a big box.

That was my solution, except i'm adding all the fabulous of loft style living.

Thought about that, by the way -- but as you point out, financing would be a bitch. I figure the utility bills must be pretty scary, too -- especially if you have a cathedral ceiling like many churches do.

I'm installing radient heat, that way you heat the zone not the entire space.

Austinhousingbubble says

StoutFiles says

If you don't mind paying more for less. Most new homes are built with subpar materials and are prepped to fail as soon as the builder warranty ends.

You're preaching to choir on this one; I am usually the lone voice in the gale when it comes to how superior the materials were that went into house construction 50-100 years ago. They look better and age better, too, so they're even more gratifying to restore than anything I see being built today. This is true of a lot of - if indeed not most - manufactured durables. Bearing this in mind, I wouldn't plan on being hands-off-head-up-the-ass on any aspect of the building process. I wouldn't build something that looked good new but aged like shit.

Old houses are built with beautiful dimensional old growth timber, however the foundations can be crap. They just hadn't figured out concrete a hundred years ago. "Renovating Old Houses" by George Nash is a good primer on what to look out for.

unstoppable says

Old houses are built with beautiful dimensional old growth timber, however the foundations can be crap. They just hadn't figured out concrete a hundred years ago. "Renovating Old Houses" by George Nash is a good primer on what to look out for.

Thanks for the tip. Even if I don't buy an old house, (which is my first choice), I love reading and talking about this stuff.

You're lucky to have scored a church. Some of the most interesting architectural flourishes can be found in old churches.

I'm sensitive to architecture myself. Ever since I was a kid, I felt instantly 'at home' in a 30's type structure than, say, an 80's type. Beyond differences in material and layout, stuff used to be drafted by hand with a T-Square and a triangle and I think that approach imparted what I perceive to be a more soulful sensibility to the final product.

I think good architecture can have a palliative if not healing effect on a lot of what ails you. I sense that much of the public, however, is inured to bad looking architecture, and it's a real shame. They should be more pissed off about it! This crap is competing with nature! My feeling is, it had better be goddamn good looking in order to justify slabbing over whatever patch of grass or whatever tree was felled for its sake!

beentheredonethat says

We were very conservative and built a 1 bedroom 1 bath (hired a good architect and got a wonderful design...)

A 1 bedroom 1 bath house ..... and you hired an Architect!!! Let me guess .... was it a 24' x24' square. WTF

You must like having headaches and stress. Building a place is a lot of problems.and then more problems.

Taint Boil says

beentheredonethat says

We were very conservative and built a 1 bedroom 1 bath (hired a good architect and got a wonderful design...)

A 1 bedroom 1 bath house ..... and you hired an Architect!!! Let me guess .... was it a 24' x24' square. WTF

No, it wasn't. You don't have much of an imagination if that is all that comes to mind with a 1/1.

It was on a steeply sloped lot with magnificent views of the mountains; the house very cleverly takes advantage of the way the light changes; incorporates outdoor spaces beautifully; the 'flow' of the house as one moves through it... This may all be unimportant to you (or others) but we felt since we were going to be living there for the rest of our lives (turned out to be very untrue) and because we had lived in various other countries with very distinct and beautiful architectures, we wanted to try for something more than a "24x24".

We gained an appreciation for what is required to create something unique and beautiful, and for why most of what is built here is neither.

Taint Boil says

A 1 bedroom 1 bath house ..... and you hired an Architect!!! Let me guess .... was it a 24' x24' square. WTF

Some of the most architecturally significant residences ever built never surpassed 1200 sq ft. And a 1/1 is fine if you don't plan on having a shit ton of children.

First go to your county building dept. & get all their info on required permits.If this doesn't discourage you ask for a reference to someone that has recently built a home from scratch & ask them what it was like.
Building on raw land is at least twice as complicated as buying a fixer & redoing it to suit yourself. An existing house has all the utilities & site permits in place. It is easier to get a loan for a remodel vs a new home. And your building pace can be less strenuous.

I like the suggestion of buying a small church. But only if you are also starting your own religion. This would get you a new career, new house & maybe a tax write off too!!

Check out the consumer complaint sites on building first, www.hadd.com and www.hobb.org Sounds like you plan on doing a custom build but custom builders have been a problem for some people, too, not just the big tract builders. I also recommend you read sites like www.buildingscience.com and www.jlconline.com (Journal of light construction and Building Science). I see a lot of new houses going up that are done wrong and will cost the home buyer thousands in later years to rip out and redo it right. (Or they will pay someone to do it over but still wrong, and wonder why it keeps leaking.)

Why all the negativity about building new? Because construction defects are costly and the legal recourse is a lot poorer than people think. Because shoddy work and shortcuts have become 'industry standard,' a phrase often used by the industry to defend in court against defects that are expensive to fix. E.g. leaks and foundation failure. Many newer materials turn out to be faulty, short lived, or require exacting installation that typical unskilled crews don't install right. Though many new houses look great and have cosmetic upgrades as "standard," the actual construction can be really poor.

I hope you find a good builder if you build, or if you remodel I hope you find a good remodeler. Better yet, I hope you find something that's right, without major overhal!

Austinhousingbubble says

ou're preaching to choir on this one; I am usually the lone voice in the gale when it comes to how superior the materials were that went into house construction 50-100 years ago.

BS. There were plenty of sub standard houses built 50-100 years ago. Most have fallen down by now. I've done a lot of remodeling. Undersize joists, no headers, out of square, the list goes on and on were pretty standard in the day. Drywall is far superior to plaster in many respects, fiberglass beats the shit out of corncobs and bricks for insulation, plywood is much better than boards for sheathing (don't accept osb), flashing and waterproofing materials are very good and simply didn't exist 100 years ago, double pane glass, etc.etc..

I like old houses, have owned a bunch, and done a lot of remodeling. But, builders 100 years ago were far from gods. Some were good, some were pretty crappy. Same with materials. No different today.

There is no reason whatsoever you can't get a very good house today. You just have to insist on using quality materials and monitoring the project. People who want the biggest house for the lowest price get what they pay for.

Austinhousingbubble says

You're preaching to choir on this one; I am usually the lone voice in the gale when it comes to how superior the materials were that went into house construction 50-100 years ago.

I am not sure if older houses were better built, but rather the well built ones survived. I suspect a lot of crap was built back then as well. So a well built 1900's house will probably last another 100 years barring any catastrophes. But then again, in a 100 years a good condition 2000 house will probably last another 100 years.

bob2356 says

BS. There were plenty of sub standard houses built 50-100 years ago. Most have fallen down by now.

Sorry, Bob -- but most off-the-shelf building materials from say, 1947, were plain fucking superior to most of what you're going to find down at the Home Cheap-o today. Even tools and machinery were made better. Quality control standards were also higher on most durable goods, too, not to mention how beautifully a lot of the old textiles aged. In my opinion, no plastic was both a blessing and a curse, though perhaps not in equal parts. Instead of all that we had stuff like Bakelite which oxidized to reveal a handsome patina over the years, and asbestos tiles that looked like fucking action paintings; artisan masonry and journeyman plasterwork; termite resistant cypress and quarter sawn oak; leaded glass and solid brass barn sinks. I'll take that warts & all over vinyl windows and wall to wall carpet.

Undersize joists, no headers, out of square, the list goes on and on were pretty standard in the day

Are you saying you don't find some this sort of thing today? I see shoddy construction going up all the time -- truly egregious shit. I'll bet that the percentage of houses thrown up during the bubble that will still be standing 60-70 years form now will be far less than the percentage from 60-70 years ago. For one thing, the ones from back then merit the periodic restorative work, whereas today's stuff is meant primarily to provide "newness." We are a newness crazed bunch, we Americans.

bob2356 says

Drywall is far superior to plaster in many respects,

Only one that I can think of, and that's convenience. Plaster is not only more aesthetic but also more mold resistant and has a much higher flashpoint than drywall.

bob2356 says

plywood is much better than boards for sheathing (don't accept osb),

Except OSB and Tyvek is mostly what you see. One thing I will cite in favor of OSB is that it's lack of a grain tends to make it more dimensionally stable for some applications. Plywood from fifty-sixty years ago is a lot different from the crap you can buy now off the shelf. It's denser. I know this from some of the speaker designs from the past that I own. And yes, it even looked better. I've seen some of this older plywood in old homes used as wall panelling because it has such a wild, handsome grain pattern.

But, builders 100 years ago were far from gods. Some were good, some were pretty crappy. Same with materials. No different today.

Well, 50 to 100 years was just meant as a general window. Probably too broad of a window. I wasn't trying to suggest that everything-old-is-superior-in-every-way. Obviously, strides have been made, particularly in plumbing, wiring, and synthetic materials. For me -- someone who hasn't lived in a building built any time after the Eisenhower administration, and can't imagine otherwise -- unless I can control what goes into a homes construction and what doesn't, I'll stick with the old stuff. There just aren't a lot of good old houses in Austin. Hence, my research into a custom build.

bob2356 says

There is no reason whatsoever you can't get a very good house today. You just have to insist on using quality materials and monitoring the project. People who want the biggest house for the lowest price get what they pay for.

Alright, this much we agree on.

Building on a slope can be costly. There is much that goes into the foundation work to make sure the house doesn't slide down the slope. The land will be cheaper, but the foundation will be much more expensive than a flat lot.

nw888 says

Building on a slope can be costly. There is much that goes into the foundation work to make sure the house doesn't slide down the slope. The land will be cheaper, but the foundation will be much more expensive than a flat lot.

Of course. But if the lot is, say, 75-80K cheaper than a relatively flat lot, and twice the size and more central...man, I don't know. I've been doing a lot of research on it and have learned quite a bit. I'm going to be checking it out with a builder soon. Any questions I should ask in particular?

oliverks1 says

I am not sure if older houses were better built, but rather the well built ones survived.

I can tell you this: when I was on assignment in Florida during the hurricanes of 2004, the houses and buildings from the thirties were the only ones that didn't have massive damage and blue tarps draped over their roofs for months on end.

It seems like almost everything made today is shit. All that matters is next quarter's profits.

unstoppable says

Old houses are built with beautiful dimensional old growth timber, however the foundations can be crap. They just hadn't figured out concrete a hundred years ago. "Renovating Old Houses" by George Nash is a good primer on what to look out for.

By "old" I didn't mean the 1800's houses, I meant older than the last 10-20 years, before the home developers started to noticeably skimp on materials.

The new condo I'm currently renting has walls so thin I can hear a mouse fart from downstairs with my door closed. A wolf could probably blow it over. I just don't trust current building techniques. People want to keep making money while house prices drop and material costs rise, so they're going to find ways to cut back on costs.

Austinhousingbubble says

KILLERJANE says

You must like having headaches and stress. Building a place is a lot of problems.and then more problems.

Have you built a place before? If so, what was your experience besides headaches and stress.

I don't enjoy headaches or stress, but there many things in life that cause grief -- including the idea of dealing with realtors/delusional sellers/greedy landlords, etc.

The point is if you are that frustrated negotiating with just a realtor, multiply by 50. There is that many more negotiations/ decisions.

I have not built but my friend did a small house in LA. It took a couple years to accomplish and now it's too small. It was any less money over buying used.

Austinhousingbubble says

Taint Boil says

A 1 bedroom 1 bath house ..... and you hired an Architect!!! Let me guess .... was it a 24' x24' square. WTF

Some of the most architecturally significant residences ever built never surpassed 1200 sq ft. And a 1/1 is fine if you don't plan on having a shit ton of children.

Look up wee houses, there small and well done, they can ship it to you.

I looked into building where I am before I bought last year; the numbers looked good at first, but when I started adding in utilities, site prep, driveways, foundations, landscaping, etc the prices climbed well above existing housing prices.
While I have not built myself, I suspect you will end up in a similar boat.
As far as the cheap lot you found - if its listed publicly and it hasn't sold after a while, it isn't cheap!
I've seen lots of good modular homes and am right now considering upgrading to one; I know people that have put them in that love them and saved money and time by going with them.

Have you looked in unorthodox directions? One of the commenters above suggested an old church - if you want space for tools and equipment more than for 'normal' living, you may want to think about a warehouse/ closed store/ repair shop or some other building not previously used for residential and that is closer to what you want than a house.
Some areas (I don't know about Austin) grandfather old business in residential areas and once the business has been closed for a short time, in my area only 6 months, the lot reverts to residential and cannot be reopened as a business which drops the property value hugely if they are not easily converted to residential.

chemechie says

Have you looked in unorthodox directions? One of the commenters above suggested an old church

No pun intended! ;-)

Never Trust Realtors says

Some of these comments are clueless.

You're back!

Austinhousingbubble says

Of course. But if the lot is, say, 75-80K cheaper than a relatively flat lot, and twice the size and more central...man, I don't know. I've been doing a lot of research on it and have learned quite a bit. I'm going to be checking it out with a builder soon. Any questions I should ask in particular?

Smart move. Having a professional to check the lot out for you is key. I'm not sure what grade of slope you're checking out, but I had looked at a hillside property (30-45 degrees), pretty steep, and it was going to cost about $1,000,000 just to put pylons 20 feet down to lock the foundation and house into place.

Oh, and if you're in a relationship, be prepared for the stresses that may come with building. Other than that, I say go for it!!

chemechie says

As far as the cheap lot you found - if its listed publicly and it hasn't sold after a while, it isn't cheap!

The price was just dropped. It's less than 100K for 1/2 acre.

chemechie says

've seen lots of good modular homes and am right now considering upgrading to one; I know people that have put them in that love them and saved money and time by going with them.

I found this website really interesting in trying to get more perspective on modular/prefab.

http://www.jetsongreen.com/2008/09/prefab-is-not-t.html

Never Trust Realtors says

Some of these comments are clueless.

Care to expound upon that? I would appreciate your thoughtful input.

Austinhousingbubble says

Well, if it's a million bucks just for piling, there is no way I'll be able to go this route. Ho-ly.

Well I think each property is different and it depends on the situation. But if you're going to have a property hanging off of a bluff, get ready to put some decent cash into the foundation. Just make sure you know what you're getting into before buying the property.

chemechie says

One of the commenters above suggested an old church - if you want space for tools and equipment more than for 'normal' living, you may want to think about a warehouse/ closed store/ repair shop or some other building not previously used for residential and that is closer to what you want than a house.

This is my way of thinking. Unfortunately, there's not much here in the city that hasn't already been seized upon by property speculators. They take something like what you describe, put in a stainless this and a granite that and market it back to me at double and triple the cost.

I can only tell you about CA.

It's not something you jump into frivolously. You have to understand zoning rules, the costs of building, permitting, etc... It can take several years to finish a basic construction, and you have to hire the right people too. There are a lot of very incompetent and bad contractors too.

If you can get cheap land and put a prefab on it it's fantastic way to save money. But not every city allows prefabs, and land is usually very expensive.

If you are trying to be "Owner Builder" put A LOT of research into it. I've seen very many people go into it and simply run out of money in the process. If you don't do it right, it can be a very expensive regret.

I can refer you to some folks out here in LA area who might give you some advice on it. But I'll stress it again, put research time into it, this isn't a simple process out here.

And lastly, you need a lot of cash. Loans for owner builders are almost non existent today. Foreclosure inventory is way too high.

Austinhousingbubble says

I found this website really interesting in trying to get more perspective on modular/prefab.
http://www.jetsongreen.com/2008/09/prefab-is-not-t.html

An interesting article - however, remember that it is aimed at those looking for a custom, or at least heavily customized, home. Local to me are companies advertising prefab homes in the $60/ sf range, far below the $125+ the writer assumes. Obviously any changes and special features will increase the cost quickly - it all depends on what you want and what you are willing to pay for.
Also, in many areas zoning and permitting are minimal costs so your design doesn't need to work around them.
I know people who have gone prefab and been very pleased with the quality, build time, and price.

Make sure its buidable before you buy it.

Check the local zoning regulations to see what the off sets are. If you’re surrounded by lots that already have improvements on them, it may be tough to fit the well and/or septic while maintaining the needed off set requirements. If you run into trouble there’s always a variance, but those aren’t guaranteed

Check with a local suveying company to make sure that the soil will allow for a septic (unless of course you have municapal sewer)