To: Les H who wrote (15524 ) 12/19/2003 8:15:04 AM From: Micawber Respond to of 306849 Not a bad article, better than most, with some balance. What the author fails to mention is that most of the new homes are not only huge, but poorly detailed and proportioned on the exteriors, much like the suburban tract homes. I think THAT, coupled with the hugeness is what most of the teardown detractors object to. Customers demand their Sub Zeros and Vikings and swimming pool sized tubs, but they don't give a sh*t about the exterior being cheap vinyl with plastic shutters and plastic trim, with ridiculous gables everywhere. In an effort to squeeze every last shekel out of these transactions, the first place to cut costs are in the exterior design and detailing, and builders all think that they can do a better design job than an architect. Developers and new owners of course claim that a 4,200 sf abomination like this raises everyone's property values, because they compare it to the former 1,200 sf 50 year-old, well detailed and proportioned ranch that they just tore down. Naturally it has a higher dollar value, because it's bigger and newer, and the kitchen gadgets cost a fortune. But over the long term, when more and more of these massive POS's are built and the town starts looking like Everywhere, USA, what has that done to property values? The town ends up looking like tract house suburbia, except all the sh*t is packed closer together. Massive Victorians were turned into duplexes and four-plexes during the Great Depression, and many once prosperous looking towns changed character quickly. Are we headed there? Teardowns became rampant in the late 80's, right before the slump. It is a classic indicator of overheating. Bring it on.