Architectural Controls - Whose House
Is it?
There's a battle underway in many
communities across the country. On one side is the irresistible
force of progress - homebuilders and developers, and homebuyers in a
hurry to move into brand-new homes. On the other side is the
immovable object of community government and citizens already
settled into growing neighborhoods. The combatants are fighting for
the right to determine what neighborhoods look like - specifically,
how to control "cookie-cutter" houses and assure diversity of
architectural design.
The families that occupy the first few homes in a new neighborhood
are often quite surprised when they find that a nearly identical
version of the home they call their own is under construction two
doors down. How did that happen? After all, when they met with their
builder they chose the brick color, the siding color, and the roof
shingles; they reversed the plan and picked the upgraded landscaping
package. But suddenly their vision of home ownership, their biggest
investment, their pride, is diluted by similar visions sprouting up
all along their street.
Homebuilders and developers, on the other
hand, are under intense financial and competitive pressure.
Development starts many years in advance of construction, when land
developers purchase and "stockpile" land for future use. It's a
speculative game, and developers cross their fingers that homebuyers
will desire today the land that they bought ten years ago. The trick
is to appeal to a wide audience and buy land in areas now that will
be in demand later. Part of that wider appeal is expressed in the
design of the homes that are offered for sale or for construction in
those neighborhoods. The safest route is always a small number of
easily modified designs that can be accurately priced and that will
satisfy the desires of the largest number of people.
When a homebuyer sits down to "customize" one of these plans, he's
usually choosing from a pre-determined vocabulary of options
designed to work well together and produce an attractive home.
That's a workable system until you consider that in a given
neighborhood, where the homebuyers are similar in age, income,
education, values, etc., it is very likely that their tastes in home
design are similar too. And before you know it, two different buyers
starting with the same basic plan have chosen similar materials and
colors. Oops - now what?
Everyone, of course, has a right to decide what his or her own house
looks like. Some of America's best homes are unique, distinctive
designs that truly reflect the personalities of their owners. But
those homes are rarely built in "typical" suburban neighborhoods.
More likely, they're on properties isolated from any significant
architectural context and need relate only to trees and land forms.
Most homes in this country are built next door to other homes. A
group of homes together forms a neighborhood, and a neighborhood
often looks best (and hold it's value best) when the homes in it
share a common design thread. But that's where the battle starts.
Houses can be too similar, and neighborhoods can take on a
monotonous character. The appeal of attractive homes is weakened.
Soon homeowners and city officials are criticizing the repetition of
comparable houses, and builders and developers find themselves
having to defend their right to build what their buyers are asking
for.
It's a complex and difficult problem but there are solutions. The
most common is instituting a design review process -- a system for
determining whether a particular design is compatible with the homes
around it. Although inherently subjective, design review can have a
high degree of objectivity if clear guidelines are drawn up.
Historic neighborhoods around the country have successfully used
design review for many years to maintain their character and
property values. Newer communities use design guidelines to
simultaneously guarantee design compatibility and assure
architectural diversity. The design review process requires that
attention be paid to the design of each home as an individual
project, not just as another permutation of a standard plan. It also
requires that each proposed design be evaluated in terms of the
houses around it.
But because of the inherent difficulty of imposing rules upon
something as subjective and personal as the design of a home, the
design review process can be cumbersome and painful.
A better solution is to put more "custom" in the custom design
process. A "true" custom home is one that is designed from the very
beginning with a particular owner's needs, dreams, desires, and
wishes in mind. When a home reflects a family's idiosyncrasies it
displays a unique character that can't be transferred to another
home. It is, by definition, distinguished from all others. Building
more true custom homes in neighborhoods facing "cookie-cutter"
problems adds much of the desired variety that raises the level of
architectural integrity for the whole community.
For the homeowner, there are several rewards for getting involved in
the custom design process. The most obvious is a house that is a
better fit to a particular family than a speculative home designed
for a broad market. That might mean that more joy and satisfaction
is found in living there. It might mean that the spaces built are
actually used - unlike many new homes where obsolete formal spaces
are little more that places to display furniture.
But the biggest reward may be financial. A custom designed home is
often a smaller home, and smaller homes give you the choice of
paying less for the entire project or of spending the savings on
better details throughout (and it's the details that make truly fine
homes). A custom designed home may also make more efficient use of
materials, saving money on the basic structure of the building. Even
the added costs of design professionals can be absorbed through cost
savings in the house itself.
A builder client of mine recently called to discuss what could be
done for a potential buyer who is "struggling" to afford to build a
home in a neighborhood where the design regulations encourage the
use of expensive exterior materials. The buyer's budget is limited,
but he doesn't want to give up space in the house; he's thinking of
cutting back on the exterior design. If he does, he's certain to
incur the wrath of the design review board. His buyer may not know
it, but he's about to become a foot soldier in the continuing battle
over the right to control the look of our communities.
Richard L. Taylor, AIA is a
published author and recognized expert in Residential Architecture.
He is President of Richard Taylor Architects, a 5-person firm in
Historic Dublin, Ohio. Residential Architect | Luxury Home Plans
Article Source:
http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Richard_Taylor,_AIA
If you are looking for a Spokane
Home Builder, please call us today at 509-466-9154 or
complete our online request form.
|