Cracked Houses: What the Boom Built

[cityimrov]

Robert and Kay Lynn lay in bed shortly after closing on their new home in the Blue Oaks subdivision in Rancho Murieta, Calif., abutting an 18-hole golf course. They were listening to the “pop, pop, pop” of what they thought were acorns falling onto the roof.

The Lynns soon realized those were not acorns dropping on the roof.

“Little did we know it was the house cracking,” says Mrs. Lynn, 67 years old. Mr. Lynn, 68, says they bought the property in 2002 for $357,000 as a weekend home and an investment. The stucco house was moving and shifting, with part of it subtly pitching toward the golf course, resulting in cracks and fissures in the walls, ceiling and floors, the couple says.

Many of their neighbors say they had similar problems. In the Sacramento Valley subdivision of about 250 houses, more than half the residents have reported some type of flaw. The Lynns and dozens of their neighbors last year filed construction-defect lawsuits against the builders, and the lead case is expected to go to trial next week. They are seeking enough money to permanently repair the houses, a figure expected to total millions of dollars.

Read the rest here: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203872404574258531574049434.html

It seems like a lot of these new neighborhoods were build with the absolute minimum legally required building code and maybe even less if they got exemptions to save money.  So what's going to happen 50 years from now when these areas really start falling apart?  Are these areas ever going to make it into "historic" status?

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

I have seen firsthand - homes built on over 200 cuyds of fill dirt with absolutely minimal packing. 

I have seen mono-slabs literally split in half before the framing was complete - only to have a rebar 'patch' made at the joint.

Clay county, specifically, was renown for not requiring compaction tests on any of their slab fills.  I wouldn't recommend any homes in Oakleaf that are near a retention pond. 

I would never and will never buy a home any any subdivision of the builders Lennar, Adams, Syntec, KB or any other mass production builder.  You get what you pay for.

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

No satisfaction at all.  Anyone who can stand for a 48 day building cycle can kiss my ass.  It takes almost a month in semi-exposed for all the lumber in the building to acclimate and that's assuming that we're not in a fluctuating temp cycle.  It takes another 3-4 weeks for the building to re-acclimate once you are sealed up and the HVAC is running.  You should never layer more than 12" of fill without compaction in-between layers.  If you want a home that if finished when you move in, it will take at least 8 months.  Unless they paid me 3 times what I'm making now (which isn't a whole lot) there's no way that I'd even consider going back to production building.  I sorry that they all haven't folded up yet. 

There are a few good ones, Pulte, Toll Bros., Standard Pacific etc..., but you have to move into their semi-custom/custom lines before you get what you're really paying for.

[Tacachale]

There was a great New York Times opinion column a few years ago about what will become of the suburbs. We have a long history of adapting and reusing urban buildings, so there's precedent for how to do it. But we've done very little in terms of repurposing suburban homes and big box stores. These homes are difficult to adapt for any other use, as they're designed to be one specific thing, and they're often too poorly constructed for it to be economically feasible to fix them up or take them apart for salvage. The practice has been to just leave them to rot and build more elsewhere.

The author suggests retrofitting these old homes with safer, greener facilities. If we were smart, not that we are, we'd at least start thinking about what we're going to do with our fading suburban neighborhoods.

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/01/11/what-will-save-the-suburbs/

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

I'm sorry, but the only re-use you're going to get out of new suburbs is old suburbs - unless the bulldozer is brought in, then you're just going to start the cycle all over.  Look at Argyle, for example, the older part of the development near Blanding is now mostly low $$$ rentals, elderly or 1st time buyers with no $$$.  As you move farther away, the homes get newer, the HOAs are more prevelant and the amount of rental units goes down.  Each era has left it's mark, but the sprawl continues.  I'm willing to be that in another 10 years, Argyle Forest Blvd will be another 10 miles longer with another shopping center at the end.

[Tacachale]

^And obviously that needs to stop. But it's not feasible to just tear down houses whenever they get old; we have to do something with them, or else the cycle will never be broken.

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

welcome to the wonderful world of disposable everything.

These homes aren't built to last.   Most builders only warranty the home for a year - there's your first clue.  Most everything else is covered by a manufacturers warranty - and most of those items don't have the full warranty because they're considered builder's grade -a step below residential grade.  The only item with a substantial life-span are your shingles (most are only using 20yr), but they are only covered against deterioration - not installation. 

[acme54321]

Nothing like some stucco covered foam formed mcmansions!

[cityimrov]

Is there any new non-custom housing in the suburbs which are built to a very high standard?  How long has this been going on for?  In general, are housing built in the 1960s better than the 2000s? 

Where are the good strongly built houses in the city? 

[duvaldude08]

I agree with this article 100%. I just bought a stucco home built in 2005 and it is not made out of anything. Just playing around I hit the wall and its hollow as hell. I was hammering the floorboard one day and the wall moved! lol by the time Im finish paying this house off, its going to be leaning to the side. They stopped building sturdy homes in the 80's. They just throw houses up these days.

[JFman00]

Urban construction is not immune. See the Berkman and to a lesser extent, Churchwell Lofts (thin walls, interior stucco separating from lath, no insulation between floors). What ever happened to pride in craftsmanship?

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

I agree with this article 100%. I just bought a stucco home built in 2005 and it is not made out of anything. Just playing around I hit the wall and its hollow as hell. I was hammering the floorboard one day and the wall moved! lol by the time Im finish paying this house off, its going to be leaning to the side. They stopped building sturdy homes in the 80's. They just throw houses up these days.

It should be better now that the demand is back to reasonable level.  You couldn't pay me to move into a home built by a production builder that was constructed from 2002-ish to '06-ish.  From the lack of skilled workers to lack of skilled inspectors.  During the time, as a PM, I didn't mind, but there were more drive-by inspections than I care to remember.  Guys would literally sign the sheets from inside thier truck.

[duvaldude08]

I agree with this article 100%. I just bought a stucco home built in 2005 and it is not made out of anything. Just playing around I hit the wall and its hollow as hell. I was hammering the floorboard one day and the wall moved! lol by the time Im finish paying this house off, its going to be leaning to the side. They stopped building sturdy homes in the 80's. They just throw houses up these days.

It should be better now that the demand is back to reasonable level.  You couldn't pay me to move into a home built by a production builder that was constructed from 2002-ish to '06-ish.  From the lack of skilled workers to lack of skilled inspectors.  During the time, as a PM, I didn't mind, but there were more drive-by inspections than I care to remember.  Guys would literally sign the sheets from inside thier truck.

They are like doll houses LOL

[Debbie Thompson]

Come on down to Springfield and buy a 100-year-old house with old growth wood so hard you can't drive a nail in it unless you pre-drill it first.  If the wall is framed with 2x4's, they are 2" by 4", not 1.5" by 3.5".  The house isn't wrapped with plastic wrap (tyvex) and then clad with 3/8" siding.  They are clad in solid wood siding, and often with real lath and plaster walls inside.  They stand tall and strong after 100 years, because they were built properly to begin with.  And with housing prices the way they are, they are available for no more, and sometimes less than, than the recent junk they are building.

[jcjohnpaint]

When I buy a house that is what I'm going to do.  I would buy a stronger house and do the fix up myself.  After working carpentry and owning a home in the past... I do not trust todays house builders or contractors.  The only one I trust is Holms on Homes.