Posted on 05/13/2014 6:12:29 PM PDT by rickmichaels
VANCOUVER In the latest weirdly expensive anomaly to hit the Vancouver housing market, a $3-million house that sold in just 24 hours will be torn down by its new owners.
Most people look at these homes and it has nothing to do with the livability, the cuteness or the character [of the home], it is the economics of the lot, said Wayne Hamill, a realtor with ReMax Select Properties.
Im not for or against whats happening; its just the way it is.
The four-bedroom house at 3981 West 35th Ave. was built in 1934 but is perfectly sound its listing notes it has lots of living space. But its being torn down because its new owners consider it too small.
At 2,950 square feet, its well below the 5,300 sq. ft that can be built on the one-fifth of an acre lot.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.nationalpost.com ...
indeed it does... must be a slow news day in Vancouver..
It’s his money to with as he wishes .
I could not live in that house, or house like that.
I have a fantasy house and it’s about 3,000 sq feet and does not have gold faucets. If I win the lottery, I will build it and be quite happy with it.
Well, we have a mere 3100 square feet... and just finalized our work with the architect yesterday for our addition of about 500 more feet. Have to start talking with contractors now, and I hear that everyone is quite busy.
My lot is worth more than my house
We have 1280 square feet on 6 acres. We use about 600 square feet and love the 6 acres.
Trend Alert: Americans Want Smaller Homes
http://www.motherearthliving.com/the-good-life/americans-want-smaller-homes.aspx#axzz31eOzJ44t
(2009)
Small House Movement
http://www.pinchauser.com/small-house-movement.htm
When Cleveland, OH, was roaring many decades ago, the rich built million-to-multi-million dollar mansions on the shores of Lake Erie. When they died, many put in their wills that the house be razed—they wanted no one to live in their homes.
If I could spend a few mil on a house, I would not buy this one. BUT, it looks sound enough to be moved to a new location, which would be much cheaper than building a similar house from the ground up.
I know a woman who had her lovely old brick home moved from Seattle all the way across the Sound to an island. Amazing photos of it on barges. Anyway, if that house could be successfully moved, so can the one in this article.
And the best part is, some eco-nazis can buy the castoffs of the knock-downs, and lecture the rest of us how “green” they are by “recycling and repurposing”.
It’s a win-win! /sarc
If it was previously owned by Progressives, the only way to get the smell of hypocrisy out is to tear it down, salt the earth and rebuild.
I sort of understand that thinking but do not share it. When we left our family home in a Chi suburb, we sold it. It was bizarre thinking of someone else living in it, but it was also comforting to be able to drive past when we were in town and see it standing proudly where we'd left it.
THEN, fast forward to recent mega-millionaire years, a neighbor paid a cool mil for our old house and tore it down because he wanted a larger yard.
THAT was sad. It was a landmark house, solidly built, stylish
.etc etc
..could have been moved to a different neighborhood and housed many more families in comfort and style.\\
Nothing unusual... when I first moved to Stockton, one of the houses I looked at was slightly out of my price range at $160,000 (this was 36 years ago) and we bought a few blocks away. It was a nice home on the corner of Parkwoods and Meadow. it sold the same week we bought our home. A week after escrow closed I was driving on Meadow and saw a bulldozer plowing through the picture window of that house. They proceeded to knock it down, fill in the swimming pool, and turn it into an empty corner lot. . . a $160,000 empty lot, where they built another slightly smaller house for the buyer’s mother. Who, you ask? The buyer also bought another piece of property the same week. The TransAmerica Pyramid in San Francisco... He owns the San Diego Chargers Football team. Alex Spanos. He lived in a modest house a couple of blocks away, and wanted a “mother’s cottage” close by. You know the three prime determiners of value in real estate: location, location, and finally, LOCATION.
Corn prices would have to improve a bit to make that work in my neck of the woods.
My dream house would be about 3000 sq.ft. and about 10 acres
and some distance from neighbors. Make it energy efficient all around and very well insulated against the elements. Include a detached workshop and greenhouse and a heated pool with spa. Have a nice big garden plot and some fruit trees in the orchard.
Main thing is to have enough money to live and not have to work except in selected projects and interests. In reality my 1500 sq. ft. home with small yard brings its own satisfactions albeit on a lesser level plus its paid for less the yearly extortions in property taxes and insurance rip offs.
If I had that kind of money I would want enough land where I couldn’t SEE another house.
Acre=43,000 sq. Ft.
Three million dollars for a fifth of an acre?
Corn prices would have to improve a bit to make that work in my neck of the woods.
Just wait till Obama finishes jacking up the required amount of ethanol in the gasoline.
here is another one a couple blocks south http://www.realtor.ca/propertyDetails.aspx?propertyId=14075945&PidKey=-405867012
just when you think vancouver real estate has hit peak crazy, it gets crazier...
Sure do like your dream house self-sufficient is important. I recently met a couple that has just about what you want. They have outdoor all-year veggie garden, fresh kale in the snow, amazing in North Idaho. It’s in a plastic walk-through tube thingy I hope to learn how to do it next time I see them.
Happy dreaming, may they all come true.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.