Author Topic: House next door razed. Giant mcmansion to be built. Sell now or wait?  (Read 10510 times)

mm1970

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6869
If you have a decent size lot, why is parking an issue?  You have room for a driveway and/or garage.
My lot is 5200 sf, but it used to be part of a double lot.  In the 1950s, it was legally split front-to-back.
So I have a house BEHIND my house, and the 100 ft long driveway goes to his house and his garage (that used to belong to our house, before it was our house).

So usable space, for us, goes down.  We cannot park in the driveway.  We have 2 off street spots in the front "yard" (as required by zoning).  And only 2 cars and 2 drivers, but what if we get a 3rd car when the teen starts to drive?  (This is unlikely).

Likewise, the back neighbor, at one point, had 4 cars and a motorcycle and 3 bicycles, for one guy.  He's down to 2 SUVs and a motorcycle and the bikes.

Across the street, many of the houses have smaller setbacks.  So, the driveway is only one car wide and one car deep, with a one car garage.  As many of the houses were built in 1940s and 1950s, the one car garage won't actually fit most cars.  I have friends with 2 big cars (they have 4 kids), an RV (which is parked in the driveway), and a work truck.  That's 3 cars on the street for one house.  Many of the other houses nearby are similar - extended family in one house with 4 cars.   3BR rental with 3 single people and 3 cars (but only driveway space for a single car).  Then the ADUs, which add 1-2 cars to a house because you are adding 1-2 drivers.  But not added parking.

dougules

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1620
  • Location: AL


What can I say?  If you try to have one car per person in a large urban area the system breaks down.  It sounds like the area is running up against that fact.  Trying to stop building to improve parking is just going to make housing even more expensive than it already is there. 

Cassie

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5739
Wow thatís small as our lot is 7500.

spartana

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 534
  • FIREd at 36? Or maybe it was 42?


What can I say?  If you try to have one car per person in a large urban area the system breaks down.  It sounds like the area is running up against that fact.  Trying to stop building to improve parking is just going to make housing even more expensive than it already is there.
That's true but my former hood isn't urban it's suburban. Approx 40-50  miles from LA and doesn't really have urban transportation structure. A few slow buses here and there but that's it. So for most here a car is needed. The area itself is mainly single story single family tract homes (very like the Edward Scissorhands photo I showed) with various shopping/commercial areas nearby and some light industry as well as a couple of big employers further out. Not a city with high rises (2 story structures were the max for  residential until last year) and no urban core.

 The hood is zoned for SFHs and doesn't have the kind of parking infrastructure that an area zoned for multifamily has like large parking structures for all the residents So with the increase of large SFHs with multiple tenants, parking becomes very tight. The city has been building g a lot of apts near the business and commercial.areas the last year or so, with lots of parking, but the prices are high so room rentals in very large houses are a common thing now. Personally I think it will end up as an AirBNB since this is in a tourist area.
« Last Edit: May 04, 2019, 09:43:48 AM by spartana »

Fomerly known as something

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 776
  • Location: Midwest
Wait.

This happened in my most recent neighborhood although not McMansion size but 2x the size of the old house.  I had one of the new ones, one of the first new ones.  The owner behind me sold for $45,000 shortly after I moved in, current tear downs began to go for at least 6 figures 3-4 years later.

dougules

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1620
  • Location: AL
That's true but my former hood isn't urban it's suburban. Approx 40-50  miles from LA and doesn't really have urban transportation structure. A few slow buses here and there but that's it. So for most here a car is needed. The area itself is mainly single story single family tract homes (very like the Edward Scissorhands photo I showed) with various shopping/commercial areas nearby and some light industry as well as a couple of big employers further out. Not a city with high rises (2 story structures were the max for  residential until last year) and no urban core.

 The hood is zoned for SFHs and doesn't have the kind of parking infrastructure that an area zoned for multifamily has like large parking structures for all the residents So with the increase of large SFHs with multiple tenants, parking becomes very tight. The city has been building g a lot of apts near the business and commercial.areas the last year or so, with lots of parking, but the prices are high so room rentals in very large houses are a common thing now. Personally I think it will end up as an AirBNB since this is in a tourist area.

What's driving the increase in prices and density that far out?  That's kind of surprising. 

spartana

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 534
  • FIREd at 36? Or maybe it was 42?
That's true but my former hood isn't urban it's suburban. Approx 40-50  miles from LA and doesn't really have urban transportation structure. A few slow buses here and there but that's it. So for most here a car is needed. The area itself is mainly single story single family tract homes (very like the Edward Scissorhands photo I showed) with various shopping/commercial areas nearby and some light industry as well as a couple of big employers further out. Not a city with high rises (2 story structures were the max for  residential until last year) and no urban core.

 The hood is zoned for SFHs and doesn't have the kind of parking infrastructure that an area zoned for multifamily has like large parking structures for all the residents So with the increase of large SFHs with multiple tenants, parking becomes very tight. The city has been building g a lot of apts near the business and commercial.areas the last year or so, with lots of parking, but the prices are high so room rentals in very large houses are a common thing now. Personally I think it will end up as an AirBNB since this is in a tourist area.

What's driving the increase in prices and density that far out?  That's kind of surprising.
Probably just good old urban expansion (build it and they will come!). People from the big cities like LA want a lower cost suburban lifestyle so over the last few decades have moved to the newly built burb or areas closer to nature/agriculture. Then others follow so more SFH tract housing is built...just a bit bigger each time...then stores and businesses and industry. Farmland and orchards are razed to.build housing tracts and malls and eventually no land is left. Then more people move in so more multifamily housing like apts and condos are built, shared housing grows and costs increase, etc.

Compared to LA and it's immediate metro area this IS an open area. But it's still a densely populated county (3 plus million and growing) and people are willing to do long commutes in heavy traffic because they want to live in.the area. Although my town still only has one high rise (so far) and you can see it for miles away if at the beach even though it's only about 10 or so floors. That's changing though. I think this is common in most big metro areas - sprawl happens when people want to move out of a city environment into the country.

Also this is in a predominately Asian American/immigrant community and it is very common to live in large multi generational family groups as well as have shared room rentals (several people sharing a bedroom) for students and workers.

« Last Edit: August 04, 2019, 11:32:35 PM by spartana »

Blindsquirrel

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 656
  • Age: 1
  • Location: Flyover country
   I think she should chill a bit before she sells. If area is going commercial, the value of her place goes up. (even if just used as a parking lot. If her area remains residential, when the monster house next door sells, her comps will go through the roof. 2 cents and worth less. :)

spartana

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 534
  • FIREd at 36? Or maybe it was 42?
   I think she should chill a bit before she sells. If area is going commercial, the value of her place goes up. (even if just used as a parking lot. If her area remains residential, when the monster house next door sells, her comps will go through the roof. 2 cents and worth less. :)
It'll stay residential as there is no more land to build commercial. The last plot of land nearby (a strawberry field) was bought out by a developer and they built a large gated master planned SFH community of big 2 story houses. I think the owner is planning to live in the ADU and rent out the big house so likely won't be sold. I think my former neighbor is staying until Aug and will sell then. Maybe try to get one of the many SFH builder/owners to buy it directly before then.

Blindsquirrel

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 656
  • Age: 1
  • Location: Flyover country
   Seems like a reasonable plan and kudos to someone who builds a small house and a large one and then rents out the large one. :)

mm1970

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6869
Wow thatís small as our lot is 7500.

It's not even that small.  Closer to "downtown" there are a number of "flag lots" that are 3500 sf, some with zero off street parking.  The homes that were more suburban and built in the 1960s and 1970s are a bit larger as far as lot and home sizes go.  More like 7000 sf lots not 5000 sf.  But for the homes built in the 1920s-1940s?  If you were working class, 5000 sf + a little (1/11 to 1/12 of an acre) were standard here.  (There are also some much larger homes on larger lots, Victorian style, etc. build in the 1890s-1940s, but they were for the wealthy folk).

Quote
What's driving the increase in prices and density that far out?  That's kind of surprising.

Population. 

I have a running cohort who is in her early 60s and is really pissed at the growth, density, traffic, etc.  So many ADUs going in, and she scrimped and paid a lot to buy her house and now it's getting crowded.  Like I said, I have sympathy for both sides.  The younger and poorer folk who have no chance of buying a home here want more growth, so at least rents will be more competitive.  The people who have preferred the no growth policies (because they like their 'hoods the way they are) say "you can't afford to live here, go somewhere else."  I feel her pain (she probably bought the house on her own), but a few quick google searches tells me she bought a $325k house 20 years ago that's worth $800k now.

When obv, the answer is in the middle and everyone is going to be unhappy. 

spartana

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 534
  • FIREd at 36? Or maybe it was 42?
^ population growth AND 30 million people wanting to live by the beach ;-).

I think the extended LA metro area sees this kind of suburban sprawl more than other large cities because you are hemmed in by the ocean, the mountains and deserts so sprawling further out and building is (comparatively) limited. I imagine more far out suburbs and smaller cities will start having the same issues and OC and other areas currently have as the LA metro area continues sprawls. Probably more "apt-like" boarding house/multiple room rental/AirBNB housing structures built in areas zoned for SFHs in.the future.

Cassie

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5739
ADUís were going to be allowed in our neighborhood if your lot was 10,000. However, the neighborhood mobilized and the ordinance was not changed to allow it.

dougules

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1620
  • Location: AL
ADUís were going to be allowed in our neighborhood if your lot was 10,000. However, the neighborhood mobilized and the ordinance was not changed to allow it.

And hence the root of the housing crisis. 

dougules

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1620
  • Location: AL
^ population growth AND 30 million people wanting to live by the beach ;-).

I think the extended LA metro area sees this kind of suburban sprawl more than other large cities because you are hemmed in by the ocean, the mountains and deserts so sprawling further out and building is (comparatively) limited. I imagine more far out suburbs and smaller cities will start having the same issues and OC and other areas currently have as the LA metro area continues sprawls. Probably more "apt-like" boarding house/multiple room rental/AirBNB housing structures built in areas zoned for SFHs in.the future.

This is probably true.  This area gets around the issue by just sprawling out further and further.  It works for a smaller city, but at a certain point it breaks down even for cities like Atlanta and Dallas that have tons of land around them.  A 30 mile commute becomes less and less feasible when traffic goes from an average of 40 mph to an average of 15 mph. 

mm1970

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6869
ADUís were going to be allowed in our neighborhood if your lot was 10,000. However, the neighborhood mobilized and the ordinance was not changed to allow it.

And hence the root of the housing crisis.
One reason why the CA governor signed the law.  Literally cities cannot prevent it - they can set up reasonable limitations - which our city has done by requiring it to be owner occupied.

spartana

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 534
  • FIREd at 36? Or maybe it was 42?
ADUís were going to be allowed in our neighborhood if your lot was 10,000. However, the neighborhood mobilized and the ordinance was not changed to allow it.

And hence the root of the housing crisis.
So I take it that if you were a long term homeowner in a tract of small houses you'd be OK with them building large high rise apt complexes on 3 sides of your house? Or even a 2 or 3 story mcmansions across the full lot? A lot of us support building small ADUs but its the building extremely large houses or multi-unit apts/housing/AirBNBs and ADUs on one small lot that is the problem for many homeowners.

In any case I didn't want this thread to get political as I was only looking to see how others would feel about something like a giant house with lots of people going up next door to them and if it would cause them to move and, if so, whether it was best to wait until finished or sell asap.

dougules

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1620
  • Location: AL
ADUís were going to be allowed in our neighborhood if your lot was 10,000. However, the neighborhood mobilized and the ordinance was not changed to allow it.

And hence the root of the housing crisis.
So I take it that if you were a long term homeowner in a tract of small houses you'd be OK with them building large high rise apt complexes on 3 sides of your house? Or even a 2 or 3 story mcmansions across the full lot? A lot of us support building small ADUs but its the building extremely large houses or multi-unit apts/housing/AirBNBs and ADUs on one small lot that is the problem for many homeowners.

In any case I didn't want this thread to get political as I was only looking to see how others would feel about something like a giant house with lots of people going up next door to them and if it would cause them to move and, if so, whether it was best to wait until finished or sell asap.

Sorry I took it in a political direction.  It struck a nerve because I hate living in suburbia, but because of politics I don't really have any better option. 

I don't think it would bother me personally to have larger units next to me once the construction was done, but I understand how it would bother other folks.  Infrastructural inertia means that somebody's going to lose as cities grow. 

Cassie

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5739
There is plenty of land for people to build out. We have parking issues because we are a 1950ís neighborhood with 1 car garages.   The whole feel of the area would change.  Plus we are fairly close to the university and nobody wants to deal with college students as neighbors.

ysette9

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5388
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
    • Insert Snappy Title Here (Journal)
I feel a lot of these issues are the result of our crappy zoning laws in the US that are unnecessarily limiting and prescriptive. Allowing cities to grow and adapt to larger populations doesnít need to be rocket science and doesnít necessarily need to put neighbors against us. Many cities around the world have figured out how to provide quality living conditions and accommodate denser populations.

Linea_Norway

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5662
  • Location: Norway
It is shocking to me that your neighbours can just do this without informing the adjacent neighbours. In Norway you need to get your neighbour's signatures on your detailed plans for rebuilding your existing home or building a new home, before you can start building. The neighbours can give their opinion and protest. You need to inform about the period of building and about any inconveniences.

spartana

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 534
  • FIREd at 36? Or maybe it was 42?
ADU’s were going to be allowed in our neighborhood if your lot was 10,000. However, the neighborhood mobilized and the ordinance was not changed to allow it.

And hence the root of the housing crisis.
So I take it that if you were a long term homeowner in a tract of small houses you'd be OK with them building large high rise apt complexes on 3 sides of your house? Or even a 2 or 3 story mcmansions across the full lot? A lot of us support building small ADUs but its the building extremely large houses or multi-unit apts/housing/AirBNBs and ADUs on one small lot that is the problem for many homeowners.

In any case I didn't want this thread to get political as I was only looking to see how others would feel about something like a giant house with lots of people going up next door to them and if it would cause them to move and, if so, whether it was best to wait until finished or sell asap.

Sorry I took it in a political direction.  It struck a nerve because I hate living in suburbia, but because of politics I don't really have any better option. 

I don't think it would bother me personally to have larger units next to me once the construction was done, but I understand how it would bother other folks.  Infrastructural inertia means that somebody's going to lose as cities grow.
No problem. It IS a hot button topic.

 In my former city they have been building many higher rise (10 story?) apt complexes of studios, one and two bedrooms to address the housing crunch. There's currently a 200 unit complex being built of just studios - which could house 400 people. But all of these large complexes are being built in commercial.areas that are zoned for multi-housing units, have tons of underground parking, easy access to commuter buses and shopping. Expecting long term residents in SFH developments to build second homes or enlarge their homes for extra housing is too much to ask. But that's just imho.

 Like you I hate suburban living and tract developments of mcmansions and would rather see more multifamily housing for new builds. But I also feel for current homeowners who have to deal with changes in their quality of life. 

spartana

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 534
  • FIREd at 36? Or maybe it was 42?
It is shocking to me that your neighbours can just do this without informing the adjacent neighbours. In Norway you need to get your neighbour's signatures on your detailed plans for rebuilding your existing home or building a new home, before you can start building. The neighbours can give their opinion and protest. You need to inform about the period of building and about any inconveniences.
I was surprised by that too but after looking it up, apparently they don't have to give you any notice unless they are changing zoning laws - building a commercial or business or apt complex. So they can legally build as big of a house as they want as long as it is 5 feet from all property lines and no more than 2 stories tall - or a big house plus a smaller one on the same lot and the neighbors wouldn't know until the bulldozer shows up one morning. Reminds me of Arthur Dent from Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy. Hope my neighbor knows where her towel is and then everything will be OK ;-).

ETA: one thing that is interesting is that in that hood and area there are a lot of Buddhist Monasteries in the expanded  SFHs. I would think that would be considered commercial or business but apparently it's not so the adjacent neighbors don't need to be informed before the Monastery  house is built or expanded. Then it goes on the "Monastary" tour and the giant tour buses show up every week parked in the middle of the neighborhood street.
« Last Edit: May 08, 2019, 08:47:56 AM by spartana »

dougules

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1620
  • Location: AL
It is shocking to me that your neighbours can just do this without informing the adjacent neighbours. In Norway you need to get your neighbour's signatures on your detailed plans for rebuilding your existing home or building a new home, before you can start building. The neighbours can give their opinion and protest. You need to inform about the period of building and about any inconveniences.
I was surprised by that too but after looking it up, apparently they don't have to give you any notice unless they are changing zoning laws - building a commercial or business or apt complex. So they can legally build as big of a house as they want as long as it is 5 feet from all property lines and no more than 2 stories tall - or a big house plus a smaller one on the same lot and the neighbors wouldn't know until the bulldozer shows up one morning. Reminds me of Arthur Dent from Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy. Hope my neighbor knows where her towel is and then everything will be OK ;-).

ETA: one thing that is interesting is that in that hood and area there are a lot of Buddhist Monasteries in the expanded  SFHs. I would think that would be considered commercial or business but apparently it's not so the adjacent neighbors don't need to be informed before the Monastery  house is built or expanded. Then it goes on the "Monastary" tour and the giant tour buses show up every week parked in the middle of the neighborhood street.

That's random, but I guess it isn't any more random than all the strange places they put churches around here.  Since monasteries are religious institutions, it's probably a lot harder to regulate their activities given the first amendment.  I remember when I lived in Oregon a church decided to raze several buildings downtown for a parking lot.  Since it was a church there was nothing the city could do to stop them.   

Why do monasteries have tour buses come through?

Goldielocks

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6445
  • Location: BC
@dougules  -- I think the core of the "problem" with not being able to do anything about new builds, is not limited to churches.

Cities have zoning bylaws, and each property is in a zone.  If the new build / new use fully conforms to the zoning for that property, then the city can do very little other than enforce safety, zoning rules, parking rules, ensure trash is picked up, construction does not just stop halfway, buildings are not left to rot, etc.

The city needs to change the zoning rules (that apply to hundreds of properties, and require public consultations) and/or add more zoning rules to get more restrictive.

As for notifying the neighbors, they will not be notified unless either a)  The whole area has a building permit rule that neighbors must be notified about any new construction  (rare, special identified areas only), or b)  The new build will not fully conform to the zoning rule.

As for churches being special -- that is only the case if they have made a specific "church" zone.  Here, I think churches are zoned just like recreational building spaces (assembly spaces, like a theatre), and need to comply with those zoning setbacks and parking rules.  In fact, the only unique thing about churches is that the spot that the building is on (but often not the parking lot) is property tax reduced / free, by long standing convention.  For that reason, it is very very difficult to get a new property zoned to be "church".  You have to buy an existing one, tear it down or renovate.

The buddist / asia religious centres are growing here, too.  And people often start them in homes, because they have a leader there and can create space by opening up a few rooms.  It starts with just 10 people and grows. Queue parking problems in the residential area.  Several have been told to go rent space in the nearby rec centres, or buy land and build using assembly zoning, but would not get the church tax status.  One that grew like this here was on farm land, building adhoc structures was told to tear it all down, get rezoned, get permits and rebuild with inspections.

Lastly, I have a suspicion that the church property you named, that tore down buildings to put in a parking lot may have had a few underlying causes -- older, under used buildings that needed expensive repairs maybe with those tiny meeting/class rooms that was the style in the 70's but now churches want larger group meetings for 30 people at a time, or they were residences for religious students that they no longer have......or most likely the city told them to -- they are not compliant with city parking regulations for their zone, and have the abilty to charge for parking during the week (if they are close to downtown) and get some income.

Cassie

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5739
I would definitely not want to deal with monastery tours and bus loads of people. Thankfully that has not happened here.  Millennials and retirees are buying the small houses in our neighborhood and remodeling them but not tearing the houses down. Most arenít even adding on in the back.

Goldielocks

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6445
  • Location: BC
I would definitely not want to deal with monastery tours and bus loads of people. Thankfully that has not happened here.  Millennials and retirees are buying the small houses in our neighborhood and remodeling them but not tearing the houses down. Most arenít even adding on in the back.
Just wait until there are enough younger / newer families that you start to have the "Monster halloween haunted house" or "Christmas light display"... with volunteers and collection of donations for a charity.

These things are terrific. to have close by.. until they start attracting more than 300 people a night.

Cassie

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5739
I will probably be dead before that happens. On the west coast but not California.

spartana

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 534
  • FIREd at 36? Or maybe it was 42?
7 bathrooms? What the hell is wrong with people?
 
How will they clean that big house and all those rooms ??
It gives all the monks living there something to do and keeps them humble ;-).

@dougules there are numerous big ornate temples near by and a whole lots small monasteries in the local hoods (4 monasteries within my hood and more a few blocks from my former home, and maybe 5 huge temples within 5 or 10 miles). So lots of tourists/worshippers from out of the area would come via tour buses to see the temples and also stop to visit the monasteries too. This is in or close to the largest Vietnamese community in.the world outside of Vietnam and a big tourist area. So it is highly probable that the new built houses could become monasteries since they have 9 bedrooms and 9 bathroom. Legally that could be 18 people living there.
« Last Edit: August 04, 2019, 11:43:48 PM by spartana »

Linea_Norway

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5662
  • Location: Norway
It is shocking to me that your neighbours can just do this without informing the adjacent neighbours. In Norway you need to get your neighbour's signatures on your detailed plans for rebuilding your existing home or building a new home, before you can start building. The neighbours can give their opinion and protest. You need to inform about the period of building and about any inconveniences.
I was surprised by that too but after looking it up, apparently they don't have to give you any notice unless they are changing zoning laws - building a commercial or business or apt complex. So they can legally build as big of a house as they want as long as it is 5 feet from all property lines and no more than 2 stories tall - or a big house plus a smaller one on the same lot and the neighbors wouldn't know until the bulldozer shows up one morning. Reminds me of Arthur Dent from Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy. Hope my neighbor knows where her towel is and then everything will be OK ;-).


Maybe it works that that here as well. I just remember that many neighbours have gotten our signature for rebuilding their existing house. It could be that plans for new houses only are displayed at the community office for those who remember to go there by themselves. Like Arthur Dent didn't.

dougules

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1620
  • Location: AL
@dougules  -- I think the core of the "problem" with not being able to do anything about new builds, is not limited to churches.

Cities have zoning bylaws, and each property is in a zone.  If the new build / new use fully conforms to the zoning for that property, then the city can do very little other than enforce safety, zoning rules, parking rules, ensure trash is picked up, construction does not just stop halfway, buildings are not left to rot, etc.

The city needs to change the zoning rules (that apply to hundreds of properties, and require public consultations) and/or add more zoning rules to get more restrictive.

As for notifying the neighbors, they will not be notified unless either a)  The whole area has a building permit rule that neighbors must be notified about any new construction  (rare, special identified areas only), or b)  The new build will not fully conform to the zoning rule.

As I was discussing earlier all the zoning, bylaws, and resistance to change is having a lot of bad consequences, too, like the price of housing.  I don't want to go political again, but I'll just say that it really isn't simple.  It's not straightforward to strike a balance of how and how much neighborhoods should or should not change with changing needs.  All the zoning and city layout you are familiar with were experimental regulatory models within the lifetime of people still alive today.  They have their upsides and their downsides. 

Quote
As for churches being special -- that is only the case if they have made a specific "church" zone.  Here, I think churches are zoned just like recreational building spaces (assembly spaces, like a theatre), and need to comply with those zoning setbacks and parking rules.  In fact, the only unique thing about churches is that the spot that the building is on (but often not the parking lot) is property tax reduced / free, by long standing convention.  For that reason, it is very very difficult to get a new property zoned to be "church".  You have to buy an existing one, tear it down or renovate.

The buddist / asia religious centres are growing here, too.  And people often start them in homes, because they have a leader there and can create space by opening up a few rooms.  It starts with just 10 people and grows. Queue parking problems in the residential area.  Several have been told to go rent space in the nearby rec centres, or buy land and build using assembly zoning, but would not get the church tax status.  One that grew like this here was on farm land, building adhoc structures was told to tear it all down, get rezoned, get permits and rebuild with inspections.

Lastly, I have a suspicion that the church property you named, that tore down buildings to put in a parking lot may have had a few underlying causes -- older, under used buildings that needed expensive repairs maybe with those tiny meeting/class rooms that was the style in the 70's but now churches want larger group meetings for 30 people at a time, or they were residences for religious students that they no longer have......or most likely the city told them to -- they are not compliant with city parking regulations for their zone, and have the abilty to charge for parking during the week (if they are close to downtown) and get some income.

The older buildings were still usable, and even if they did need extensive repairs, the economics of land in downtown Portland would have easily supported it.  The city did not want them to add parking as that they're trying to reduce the number of cars downtown. 

Interestingly enough an old house about a mile north of me has been converted into a Vietnamese Buddhist temple.  I had seen the big Buddha out front, and just now looked it up.  I guess it's not just California. 

It looks like you are in Canada, so there would be different laws on how zoning can work with religious buildings.  The US constitution makes it a lot harder to regulate things when it's a religious institution involved. 

Goldielocks

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6445
  • Location: BC

It looks like you are in Canada, so there would be different laws on how zoning can work with religious buildings.  The US constitution makes it a lot harder to regulate things when it's a religious institution involved.
Not really..at the country level. It is all based on local ordinances.  Some states and cities are more "free for all", some are less so when it comes to church properties.  I worked both sides of the border.   I have never seen a jurisdiction that did not enforce building safety regulations when it comes to churches, for example.... unless grandfathered in due to age.   They may be lenient on timeline, but no one is willing to take on the liability of approving an unsafe structure.   Likewise, I have not seen any that ignored local parking regulations and bylaws... they would accept reasonable alternatives, but not ignore it.

spartana

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 534
  • FIREd at 36? Or maybe it was 42?
^I think we are very similar in Calif, which may have more safety codes then other states due to earthquake issues. Parking is pretty regulated too. I just googled how SoCal cities deal with parking in neighborhood church/temple zones and it varies city by city but basicly if its in a hood of SFHs and on public streets the rules favor the homeowners over the church or other "commercial" kind of thing. Although I doubt parking regulations are enforced unless you get a lot of complaints.

 Its like AirBNBs in my old city - technically they aren't allowed,  and technically you can file  a complaint with code enforcement, but they admit they don't actually enforce it.

Anyways the slab for the ADU is being poured right now and apparently it is 5 feet from her lot line (and 10 feet from her house) and will be 35 feet long along her property line. The big house lines have been chalked in to mark its location along with the 3 car garage and 3 car driveway,  and it'll cover the whole lot with the ADU. So now that they are already starting the actual construction she plans to wait before deciding to sell.

robartsd

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2429
  • Location: Sacramento, CA
ADUís were going to be allowed in our neighborhood if your lot was 10,000. However, the neighborhood mobilized and the ordinance was not changed to allow it.

And hence the root of the housing crisis.
So I take it that if you were a long term homeowner in a tract of small houses you'd be OK with them building large high rise apt complexes on 3 sides of your house? Or even a 2 or 3 story mcmansions across the full lot? A lot of us support building small ADUs but its the building extremely large houses or multi-unit apts/housing/AirBNBs and ADUs on one small lot that is the problem for many homeowners.

In any case I didn't want this thread to get political as I was only looking to see how others would feel about something like a giant house with lots of people going up next door to them and if it would cause them to move and, if so, whether it was best to wait until finished or sell asap.
Most 10k+ sf lots are plenty big for a smal ADU. While state law allows ADU, local jurisdiction could set reasonable limits to minimize impact on neighbors (setbacks, off-street parking requirements, limitation on short-term rentals, maximum occupancy limits).

spartana

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 534
  • FIREd at 36? Or maybe it was 42?
ADUís were going to be allowed in our neighborhood if your lot was 10,000. However, the neighborhood mobilized and the ordinance was not changed to allow it.

And hence the root of the housing crisis.
So I take it that if you were a long term homeowner in a tract of small houses you'd be OK with them building large high rise apt complexes on 3 sides of your house? Or even a 2 or 3 story mcmansions across the full lot? A lot of us support building small ADUs but its the building extremely large houses or multi-unit apts/housing/AirBNBs and ADUs on one small lot that is the problem for many homeowners.

In any case I didn't want this thread to get political as I was only looking to see how others would feel about something like a giant house with lots of people going up next door to them and if it would cause them to move and, if so, whether it was best to wait until finished or sell asap.
Most 10k+ sf lots are plenty big for a smal ADU. While state law allows ADU, local jurisdiction could set reasonable limits to minimize impact on neighbors (setbacks, off-street parking requirements, limitation on short-term rentals, maximum occupancy limits).
Yeah I googled some of the surrounding towns and they are all a bit different but the differences are minimal. One city near by actually allows you to build 2 4000 sf or larger 2 story house on one smallish lot as long as its within the required setbacks from all the lot lines - which seems to be around 4 or 5 feet on the sides and back and 10 - 20 feet in front.

This particular lot is 7,995 sf total. 60 ft wide. The big house will be 50 ft wide (not sure how long though)  with a 4 ft gap between it and the ADU, which is in the rear and is around 35 ft wide along the width of the property. So other than a small open area in the back corner of the lot, both houses plus 3 car garage and 3 car driveway pretty much cover the entire lot.

So I don't think its the ADU or a big rear extention people have much issue with, its the big 2 story 4000 sf or bigger mcmansions on relatively small lots people have a problem with in SFH hoods. But being this is SoCal and land is at a premium (and people want giant houses and ADUs) I imagine the trend of razing small houses and building one or two big houses will continue...until the next housing downturn at least.
« Last Edit: May 14, 2019, 03:52:25 PM by spartana »

spartana

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 534
  • FIREd at 36? Or maybe it was 42?
Former neighbor found out some more info from owner and is now wondering if she should move asap and perhaps take advantage of the investors who are now sniffing around her house.

Basicly it is going to be used for student housing for the local college. The owner and his wife will be living on the bottom floor of the big house and the upper 6 beds/6 baths plus the 2 bed/2 bath ADU will be rented to students. They plan to put 2 beds in each room for 2 renters per room. That is a common thing around there. So 16 students max, or maybe less if someone pays higher for there own room,  plus the owners. Most of the houses there also illegally convert the garage to living space so could be additional people.

So, if you were in this situation, would you sell asap before/while it's being built (all the sewer lines installed now) or wait until its done and people start moving in for the next school year (end of August)? I'm thinking that to a potential buyer a huge house and ADU being built next door might be OK but one that will have tons of students living there might be a horror.

ETA just googled and in this city you can only have max two people per bedroom and must rent at least 31 days so no daily or weekly rentals. But there appears to be some places that have up to 6 people per room so maybe the law is not enforced. Since it appears to mostly be international students from Asia there may be different rules. Here one example of a room rented to students in another town:
« Last Edit: May 19, 2019, 09:59:56 AM by spartana »

Cassie

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5739
That definitely changes things but if the owners are living on site they arenít going to want to live in a noisy party house either.

spartana

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 534
  • FIREd at 36? Or maybe it was 42?
That definitely changes things but if the owners are living on site they arenít going to want to live in a noisy party house either.
Well the owners are legally suppose to live onsite but whether they really do or not might be a different story. However I think most Asian students are quiet and respectful - at least that seems to be the stereotype and my own experience living there - so might not be a party house.

robartsd

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2429
  • Location: Sacramento, CA
Since it appears to mostly be international students from Asia there may be different rules. Here one example of a room rented to students in another town:
I highly doubt that the rules are different, but the international students expectations for privacy and space likely is different than US born students. If they are indeed quiet and respectful (and also mostly car-free) then the impact on the neighborhood might not be too bad; but I'd still rather not have the big house right next to my property line. The good news about a housing impacted college town is that residential property values are unlikely to decline.

dougules

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1620
  • Location: AL
A big question to me would be if she does move, where would she go, and what would it cost?

spartana

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 534
  • FIREd at 36? Or maybe it was 42?
Since it appears to mostly be international students from Asia there may be different rules. Here one example of a room rented to students in another town:
I highly doubt that the rules are different, but the international students expectations for privacy and space likely is different than US born students. If they are indeed quiet and respectful (and also mostly car-free) then the impact on the neighborhood might not be too bad; but I'd still rather not have the big house right next to my property line. The good news about a housing impacted college town is that residential property values are unlikely to decline.
I think it would likely be a quiet house if mostly international students and parking won't be an issue either - close to buses that go currently to a couple of community colleges and not far from 3 big state universities and several city and private colleges. So I'm sure that's a huge relief from thinking it might be a AirBNB party house or frat house or even just multiple extended family/friends house. The international student housing is a big thing here so, besides a giant house and second house a few feet from her living room, its probably ok.

Here's a craigslist ad I saw for a private house near UCLA and USC that seemed similar although house is much smaller. The owner could make a killing! Something for the MMM landlords  to think about:

"Are you looking for a vibrant place to share with other students? Share your bedroom with another student or have a private bedroom for yourself. Everything is included (sheets, towels, utilities, wifi, and kitchen utensils) so just bring your luggage.
This is a massive 3300 sf 8 bedroom house.

Private Room = $1600/month
Shared Room = $1100/month"

@dougules I'm not sure where she'd move to but would probably move to a condo or townhouse in a nearby town she likes a lot and rent. Very expensive there but she has lots of equity in the house.

lhamo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 9835
  • Location: Seattle
At this point her best bet is probably to wait it out and see what happens.  If the project ends up being successful but annoying to live next to, she'll most likely be able to sell to a developer wanting to replicate the successful model.

Or she sells to a developer now.  I can't see any mainstream family wanting to buy her place while the construction is going on and before the results are known.  At least not at a reasonable price.

Goldielocks

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6445
  • Location: BC
International students with the owners on site is a LOT quieter/ better than many other higher density rental situations.

dougules

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1620
  • Location: AL
At this point her best bet is probably to wait it out and see what happens.  If the project ends up being successful but annoying to live next to, she'll most likely be able to sell to a developer wanting to replicate the successful model.

Or she sells to a developer now.  I can't see any mainstream family wanting to buy her place while the construction is going on and before the results are known.  At least not at a reasonable price.

+1  There's a good chance it won't be as bad as she thinks it is once the construction dust settles. 

That is unless she could get really good money relative to where she wants to move. 

It seems mildly ironic that she wants to move to a condo. 

mm1970

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6869
At this point her best bet is probably to wait it out and see what happens.  If the project ends up being successful but annoying to live next to, she'll most likely be able to sell to a developer wanting to replicate the successful model.

Or she sells to a developer now.  I can't see any mainstream family wanting to buy her place while the construction is going on and before the results are known.  At least not at a reasonable price.

+1  There's a good chance it won't be as bad as she thinks it is once the construction dust settles. 

That is unless she could get really good money relative to where she wants to move. 

It seems mildly ironic that she wants to move to a condo.

Only mildly though, as condos generally have assigned parking, more rules about who can live there, open spaces.

spartana

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 534
  • FIREd at 36? Or maybe it was 42?
At this point her best bet is probably to wait it out and see what happens.  If the project ends up being successful but annoying to live next to, she'll most likely be able to sell to a developer wanting to replicate the successful model.

Or she sells to a developer now.  I can't see any mainstream family wanting to buy her place while the construction is going on and before the results are known.  At least not at a reasonable price.

+1  There's a good chance it won't be as bad as she thinks it is once the construction dust settles. 

That is unless she could get really good money relative to where she wants to move. 

It seems mildly ironic that she wants to move to a condo.

Only mildly though, as condos generally have assigned parking, more rules about who can live there, open spaces.
Yeah condos and townhouses are not only MUCH cheaper to rent (or buy) then a SFH in that area, but the rules and regulations generally mean they are very pleasant places to live. I'm sure she'd rather buy a SFH (or maybe not - lots of work for a single person) but a nice townhouse would be half the cost.

Just did a Google search and median housing prices are around $750k and median condo/townhome prices are $450k. That's to buy. Her house would sell as a tear down for around $600k. If she had enough equity she could buy a townhouse or condo with all cash if she wanted. Not sure that's what she'd do.
« Last Edit: May 21, 2019, 12:37:29 PM by spartana »

spartana

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 534
  • FIREd at 36? Or maybe it was 42?
At this point her best bet is probably to wait it out and see what happens.  If the project ends up being successful but annoying to live next to, she'll most likely be able to sell to a developer wanting to replicate the successful model.

Or she sells to a developer now. I can't see any mainstream family wanting to buy her place while the construction is going on and before the results are known.  At least not at a reasonable price.
I think she feels the opposite - no regular home buyer would want to buy her place if it ends up being student housing with 18 or more transient people living there. Or maybe an AirBNB. Or both. Right now it just looks like a big fancy house and ADU is going in which "may" house a regular larger extended family.

Plus its building season and she may have a harder time selling in the fall or winter as owners may not want to do anything on the place until next summer. Although this being SoCal all year long is building season - assuming you can get the SoCal construction workers outside when the temps drop to 65 ;-).

Personally I'd sell asap and just find a place to rent. But I'd be freaking out if that big of a group of transient people would be living next door to me. It's part of the reason I moved from that area originally. Apparently they are pouring concrete for the foundations today so the framing will start soon.

ChpBstrd

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1507
A friend of mine put his house on the market in a panic when he learned a WalMart super center was to be built down the road. I checked the neighborhood prices a few years after the sale and after the WalMart and the prices had increased in line with all the other neighborhoods in the area. They lost probably tens of thousands of dollars in house-trading expenses for nothing.

ChpBstrd

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1507

That type of thing is happening to my neighborhood in Seattle too.  My neighborhood is mostly post WWII, small houses.   Four houses on my street (in one block) have been scraped and rebuilt as luxury homes.   That says to me the value of my house is almost entirely in the land.  And that's probably true for your friend as well.  Since the value is in the land, it probably doesn't matter too much when she sells.  But as a SWAG, it might be better to wait until after they build and sell the McMansions, because that's proof of concept that the tear down model is viable in your neighborhood.   

...which leaves me a little torn.   If my house's value is mostly in the land, I could scrap it myself, rebuild with a McMansion, and then sell it.   Because I bought before the huge run-up in real estate, my cost basis would be much lower than the new McMansion down the street.  Like $550K lower.   If those guys are making money, I could make even more.   But I've put considerable sweat equity into my house and yard and I've become attached.  I realize it is foolish to become attached to inanimate objects, yet here I am.

As someone living in a part of the country where home price appreciation has been 1-2% for the past several decades and where home prices per square foot rarely exceed the cost of building per square foot, I would love to switch places with you and be able to become a millionaire simply for the trouble of hiring a developer. Zero plus a rounding error of people in the world have such an opportunity in front of them. I hope you appreciate that, because I'd be all over it. I also wonder how long such exuberance can last.

spartana

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 534
  • FIREd at 36? Or maybe it was 42?

That type of thing is happening to my neighborhood in Seattle too.  My neighborhood is mostly post WWII, small houses.   Four houses on my street (in one block) have been scraped and rebuilt as luxury homes.   That says to me the value of my house is almost entirely in the land.  And that's probably true for your friend as well.  Since the value is in the land, it probably doesn't matter too much when she sells.  But as a SWAG, it might be better to wait until after they build and sell the McMansions, because that's proof of concept that the tear down model is viable in your neighborhood.   

...which leaves me a little torn.   If my house's value is mostly in the land, I could scrap it myself, rebuild with a McMansion, and then sell it.   Because I bought before the huge run-up in real estate, my cost basis would be much lower than the new McMansion down the street.  Like $550K lower.   If those guys are making money, I could make even more.   But I've put considerable sweat equity into my house and yard and I've become attached.  I realize it is foolish to become attached to inanimate objects, yet here I am.

As someone living in a part of the country where home price appreciation has been 1-2% for the past several decades and where home prices per square foot rarely exceed the cost of building per square foot, I would love to switch places with you and be able to become a millionaire simply for the trouble of hiring a developer. Zero plus a rounding error of people in the world have such an opportunity in front of them. I hope you appreciate that, because I'd be all over it. I also wonder how long such exuberance can last.
I don't know. In places like coastal Calif land value has long outpaced house values if it's a small older home. Even larger newer homes are bought for the land value (location location location!) and often razed to build something new and shiny. That hasn't really changed much over the years and probably unlikely too. However another housing crash could happen and it hard to sell for such a high amount.