In reality, the article has a bunch of real data and useful insight but it starts out with three paragraphs of 21st century “scare journalism”. The typical reader will get only get as far as the first part and never get to the real information – which says a lot for the modern attention span visa vi a 3000 word article. It’s also unfortunate the author makes reference to a number of sources but neglects to actually know anything about them. For example, there are numerous references and credits to work by Arthur C. Nelson of the Metropolitan Institute at Virginia Tech. From what I’ve read, Mr. Nelson goes by “Chris”. It took me all of 45 seconds to find that out.

So, if you’ve gotten this far, you are doing better than most. I deliberately spend two paragraphs on stuff unrelated to my post, in part to make a point and also to lambaste some of today’s journalists. Now for the real information.

Are people moving from the cities to the suburbs -or- are people moving from the suburbs to the cities. I think the answer is both. Perhaps the difference is the demographics of the cities vs the suburbs. It’s my supposition that the demographics undulate like some strange circadian rhythm.

The city offers “everything on one place” and ironically is more environmentally “green” than it’s suburban counter. In this case, my definition of “green” refers to the fact that a 100 people living in a condominium tower and walking or using public transportation, have a lower carbon footprint than those same 100 people living in individual homes and driving private automobiles to get everywhere – especially when you add up the the carbon footprint of building the dwellings, automobiles, etc. Further, you can make a much greener condominium tower for 100 people then you will make suburban homes for the same population.

Singapore is a perfect example of this “city center” engineered society.  By constructing high rise complexes for living; then clustering basic needs – first level schooling, food, basic shopping, etc. – at ground level; and connecting these centers to the major facilities via train, you leave a lot of open space for trees, grass, and outdoor areas. Plus, you have reduced the need for traffic for basic necessities to near zero and optimized public traffic at the same time.

Unfortunately, Singapore is a special case. There is very little “growth history”. Imagine how different Boston, Chicago, Francisco, or Seattle would be if you literally wiped them off the map and said; “go build it, new”.

Now for the rub. As a commenter wrote, “in many cities, like Austin, major employers are not necessarily all centered downtown”. My employer is just such an example. Over the past decade, they have moved further and further from the city. They once had a work population of 1000 in Boston, now they are making yet another step further out – even abandoning an established site to move another 10 miles down the road. Why ? Simple – it’s cheaper for them.

Most companies do not look at non direct costs (“green” or “greenbacks”). If they can get the job done for less, they will. As long as they can get a workforce to do the job, it does not matter if the work is done in a city center, the suburbs, or South Africa. I expect there will be a time not too far in the future, where “payment for work” will get a serious adjustment – downward in high paying areas just as it has gone upward in low cost geographies around the world. If Ford could build a car in Detroit for the same cost as in Mexico, they’d likely choose Detroit. Of course, it means the Detroit auto worker will have to make less than they do now. It also means the cost of housing, health care, etc. will need to get under control, which means insurance companies and drub manufacturers will need to be realistic, … and the flattening goes on and on.

So, what does this mean ? I think it means that cities and suburbs will ebb and flow. I think it means people will prioritized their needs and wants and then match those to the places where they live, the places where they work, and the impact they will have on world (this last one is deliberately nebulous since people will choose too prioritize their definition of that too).

Now, you can agree. You can agree to disagree. You can disagree outright. If you are still reading, surprise surprise, then you might want to read the original article, CNN’s “cities are hot” article, FoxNews’s “flocking to the suburbs” article, Men’s Style saying “move to the suburbs” article, Dayton’s “Gray to Green“, or Google for lots more including Down Under !

When I designed my first house, I absorbed all of the conventional (American) wisdom of sizes, shapes, and layouts for bedrooms, baths, kitchen, dinning & living rooms. I even went so far as to know that I didn’t want a TV in the living room so I had to add a den. I ended up with 1600-1800sqft before the “media room” went in over the garage. There was also a full basement that contained the laundry and equipment (furnace, water heater, electric panel, etc.)

Now, let’s dissect the usage of that house. The house had three bed rooms and three baths. The den also qualified as a bedroom so there would be a first floor bedroom if needed. For most of the time, I had the house to myself. I did change which bed room I used from time to time. The same goes for the bath. But, at any given time, I primarily used the kitchen (a lot as I love to cook), the den, one bath, one bedroom for sleeping and one for a home office. I couple probably count the number of times I used the dining room (mostly just for parties) or the living room (only when no other space would work).

That leaves me with a kitchen, a bedroom, a guest room / office, a bath room, a multi-function room, and a service/equipment room. I would like to have a washroom if it fits.

I am getting ideas from anywhere I can find them. What is interesting is that, when it comes to efficient space designs, all of the initiatives are in Europe with many in the UK. If you are curious, try Google-ing “compact bathroom” or “wet room” and choose “images”. You will see some good industrial design in action.

Each room in the “compact and comfortable” home will need its own research. The bedroom may be the most inefficient room of the house. This is a factor of “furniture” more than anything. I have a nice bedroom set. I am considering repurposing some of the pieces and moving them out of the bedroom. The bathrooms will turn out to be easier than I thought because, in Europe, they have been focusing on bathroom design for many years. The kitchen and home office will be exercises in “layout”.

Over the next few months, I will add a post-per-room as I figure out details. Stay tuned …

So, if you look at the basic real estate sales process, there is: listing, showing, offer, acceptance, inspection, and closing. At what point do you consider the real estate as “sold” ? I’m the guy who says it’s not “sold” until the check in in the bank. But that’s a long way down the path. Perhaps I should look for a bit of optimism and call is “go” after a successful inspection.

What do you think ?

I signed on with another Realtor – one who is well known in my neighborhood and has a number of referral recommendations.

I think things are working out much better. Time will tell. I like the look of the virtual tour they created for the house. Since many of my family and friends have either not seen the house or not seen it in a long time, I thought I’d post a link here. I don’t expect the link to work forever – especially once the house sells. But for now, anyone interested can take a look at the Virtual Tour of my House.

I started living on my current house with about 900 sqft. The house has grown to 2500 sqft. I’m a solo empty nester now and as such I don’t use most of the house. For those of you who now find you house with fewer residents than in the past, when was the last time you used some of those abandoned rooms ? Have you tried sleeping in the guest bed ? Washed up in the kids bathroom ?

So I’ve started designing a smaller house. My first attempt was 1500 sqft. I’m now on my second attempt at 1200 sqft. If I leave out the out-building for the work shop I hope to get under 1000 sqft on my final attempt. I’ll be honest, I plan to get a little professional help – designers and/or architects specializing in both “green” building and “designing for small spaces”.

BTW: the 30″x31″ foot print of the pictured Neo-Comby toilet+basin will set you back about $5000 !. I guess the real question isn’t designing a 1000 sqft home but rather if I can do it on something less than the budget of one of those Mac-Mansions.

My question is “how small is big enough ?” What do you think ?

This trip had just one goal – to lay the boundary of the building site. Everything is a mater of scale on the farm and the building site is no different. The barn will be 80′x100′ and will have another 12′ overhang making the footprint 92′x100′. In addition, there needs to be space for the driveway, the turnaround, farm equipment, etc. So, the building site is about 3 acres – enough to leave some breathing room. It took me 8 hard hours to clear just one site line. Fortunately, I only needed to clear one line as the building side is a rectangle and bordered on three sides by fields.

To make things a little easier, I opted to camp on the property. My nearest family is about 90 miles away. That’s $35 of fuel at current prices and $34 in tolls. I probably could find a dog friendly hotel (Zen is traveling with me) but I figured it might be fun. It was and it wasn’t.

They always talk about how bright the stars are at night when you are in the country. The Farm definitely confirms it. However, I can’t recall once hearing movie dialog talk about how far noise travels with the land is flat and mostly crops and fields. Last night, Zen had a tough time relaxing because she first heard a car go by – starting about a mile and a half down the road and continuing a mile and a half in the other direction. (I should also say, some roads around the farm are long and straight.) Next was the train. It was about 2 miles away (at its nearest) but again, everything is flat and there are no overpasses or underpasses so the railroad tracks cross every side road and the train blows the horn multiple times AT EVERY SIDE ROAD <argh>.

We did manage to get some sleep. Still, I would have like more considering the work ahead. It was a brisk morning so I opted for a hot breakfast – stew on a camp stove. My camp stove is very old school. I don’t know if they make it anymore but it has a big advantage over some of the more modern units – it will use just about anything as fuel – white gas, unleaded, diesel, kerosene, or even alcohol.

My realtor has not had much activity for my listing and after taking a recent seminar came to me with a recommendation.

Now, conventional wisdom says, if there has not been much activity on a listing it is one of location, price, or presentation.

One two separate “realtor tours” – where a group of realtors visit new listings to see for themselves – the consensus was a nice house that is more than they expected. I took that as good news.

However, the lack of buyer traffic means something is wrong with the three points of the triangle. Having seen the website listing for my house, I strongly feel the “presentation” is part of the problem. I took my realtor 5 weeks to clean that up. But I feel that damage has been done.

Here is the ethics question – my realtor, after having just completed the seminar, comes to me and says, “we need to create some energy around your house”. OK, I like the sound of that. He goes on to say, “We should drop the price of the house by $70,000″. I could see a $10,000 or even a $20,000 price change given the market but not $70,000. He explains, “The idea is to generate excitement and get multiple bid offers and then have the buyers bid the price back up to closer to what you expect.”

Now, I am very suspect to the idea that a number of bids will come in “instantly” from this activity and more likely we will get one or perhaps two offers below the radically lower asking price. Worse case is we get an offer *at* the asking price.

I do not believe it is ethical to list a product for a fixed price when there is no intention to actually sell if for that price. It’s false advertising and I believe it is illegal.

So, is the behavior of my realtor illegal ? Worse yet, is there a professional seminar being taught that recommends this unethical behavior ? The more I think about this situation, the more irritated I become. I also wonder what action I should or should not take.

I’ll need to work this one out for myself. I hope this is not common practice and I hope you don’t get faced with this type of behavior.