More then 50% of my houses value is the land. (Based off taxes)
More than 50% of my house is the land too and my house is valued at 1.8M. Guy doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about.
Pretty much.
There's a house in my neighborhood that was built in 1916 (which is pretty old for this part of Dallas, there are late 1800's houses down near the original city center) that has a historical protection on it, but the historical protection only applies to the original facade. So they quite literally cut everything off of it behind the front facade and completely rebuilt it, and just hooked that front facade up to it. It's a brand new house with subterranean garage, indoor pool, etc but it's got this old colonial front. It's hilarious. It actually looks good now but when they were rebuilding it it looked crazy.
It's not ness due to historical reasons. There are environmental reasons as well. Boat loads of led paint and asbestos. Mine had it all removed/certified before we moved in. No more led paint or asbestos (if there was asbestos in it).
There's a house in my neighborhood that was built in 1916 (which is pretty old for this part of Dallas, there are late 1800's houses down near the original city center) that has a historical protection on it, but the historical protection only applies to the original facade. So they quite literally cut everything off of it behind the front facade and completely rebuilt it, and just hooked that front facade up to it. It's a brand new house with subterranean garage, indoor pool, etc but it's got this old colonial front. It's hilarious. It actually looks good now but when they were rebuilding it it looked crazy.
At least everyone has to put up with the same bs rules. Hell, Truman gutted the White House and left only the exterior shell in the 1950s.
Yes, it's primarily cost. Wood's cheap, everyone knows how to work with it, and so on. Even for 4 story apartment buildings, the vast majority of them are still wood structurally. The general rule of thumb for a 4 story apartment building is that going to steel or concrete will add 15-20% to the cost of the building.
How is that possible, most of the cost of the building is not the framing. Even if the framing costs 3X as much to do in steel, how does that affect the overall cost of the building that much??
Do you live in a suburban development constructed post 1980, preferably post 2000? I'm not talking about urban neighborhoods in big cities. That's a completely different thing.
No. Most of the houses (90%+?) in my town were build pre 1970 (a huge chunk pre 1930, like mine which is ~1910).
That house was built in 1897 and is 4000 sq ft or so and only worth $220k. Total fucking money pit.
