Residential Real EstateAttack Of The Cookie-cutter Home
Current census data states that the population within the United States is increasing by one person every eleven seconds. Most of these people are finding their homes somewhere along the Sun Belt, which means that those states are experiencing the majority of this population growth. Many of us who reside in these areas have all ready witnessed suburban sprawl encroach and then envelope the once utopian rural lifestyle.
Concurrently, those of us forced to navigate along the roadway systems in these once rural areas are now faced with traffic, congestion, and longer commute times. For land developers and contractors however, this increase in population translates to more work and higher profits. However, in order to maximize land use and profit margins land developers and contractors scramble to erect homes under tighter timelines and within tighter spatial boundaries. The result is acres of uniform houses situated on small parcels of land, the “cookie-cutter” house.
Most land developers and contractors embrace the “cookie-cutter” house because they can buy the building materials in bulk and therefore receive greater discounts. The bigger the bulk purchase, the bigger the discount. Another reason that land developers and contractors embrace the “cookie-cutter” house is because they only need to purchase two or three architectural renditions that are then used for the development of several homes. This, of course, also saves money. In theory all of these discounts are then past on to the customer and hence an individual can obtain “more house” for their dollar.
The problem with this approach is that homes lose their uniqueness, and flare for individual personality. For those of us who remember automobiles in the middle 1980’s and early 90’s, we might recall how most of the automobiles started to resemble one another. This happened partly because the auto industry wanted to maximize aerodynamics, but also because they could cross use parts thereby reducing their overall costs. The result was automobiles that were clones of each other. However, this trend in auto design was short-lived, barely ten years.
This is because humans have an innate desire for individuality and self-expression. For most adults this expression of individuality is manifested in external items such as homes, automobiles, recreational vehicles, etc. The automobile industry figured this out fairly quickly and started to design automobiles that balk uniformity; the PT Cruiser, the new Cadillacs with their “edgy” design, and the Hummer are all examples of how automakers have altered the appearance of automobiles in order to cater to the human desire for uniqueness and expression of self.
The unfortunate truth is that land development in the past five or so years are where the automakers were in the early 80’s. However, automobiles eventually end up scrap metal, these “cookie-cutter” homes will be around for a quite a while.
Another issue arising with these mega developments is the speed at which they are assembled. After being involved with the construction of several properties, the one thing I have noticed is that most wood used today, partly because of demand, has more moisture then did the wood used for construction in the past. As the wood dries, the wood shrinks and rather then shrinking on the lot, it is shrinking as part of the structure. Combine this factor with the multitude of short cuts taken in order to meet time lines, and the reduced quality of products and we have a home that will wear out and breakdown faster than the average 30-year mortgage. Ergo, in ten or fifteen years we will probably see those massive developments slowly turn into slums because supply for these types of home will outstrip demand. People will want unique and individual homes that reflect who they are, and they will be tire quickly of the expenses required to upgrade their “cookie-cutter” home. The flip side is that those who have older unique homes will find the demand for their properties increase because the supply will be limited.
Another issue has to do with diminished land. Many of the developed areas with “cookie-cutter” homes have the actual structure situated within feet of the neighboring property and very little land. Developers/contractors do this so they can squeeze more homes into tighter areas thereby maximizing the profits derived from the land itself. Helping to justify reduced land is the long commute times, and an overstressed population. Many younger families cringe at the idea of yard work because most people simply don’t have the time. Therefore, less property translates to less maintenance. However, reduced yards can have a negative impact on the overall development of children.
Revolutionary work into an area called Restorative Environments conducted by researcher Rachael Kaplan show conclusively that children exposed regularly and for significant durations to open green spaces not only perform better in school, but also tend to have lower stress levels, and exhibit lower aggressive behaviors. Likewise, larger yards tend to encourage more physical activity, which helps to decrease physical weight while increasing the overall health of children. Unfortunately, many of new “cookie-cutter” homes, however, lack yards sufficient for children to run, play, and interact with other neighborhood children.
Clearly, the invasion of the “cookie-cutter” home is not the utopia being touted by many within the industry. They clearly have many flaws stemming from the lack of individuality, to less-then desirable construction, and the limited land available for developing children. Of course there is the upside and that is that affordable homes are available for the first-time buyer.
I believe that the key is balance. Land developers and contractors ought to be developing communities with a multitude of architectural designs and unique attributes for the high-end buyer, as well as develop the “cookie-cutter” developments for the first-time buyer. However, as it stands, we have copious developments of “cookie-cutter” homes that are being erected with very few (if any) developments of architecturally unique homes with personality and flare. If this trend continues, the result could very well be a glut of undesirable homes in the future.