Though less common than in the past due in part to lawsuits that have challenged their constitutionality , such regulations still exist. In the suburbs around Atlanta, Ga. For single-story houses, these minima range from to 1, square feet m2 ; for two-story houses, they range from 1, to 2, square feet m2. Far more common than minimum house size regulations in municipal zoning ordinances are restrictive covenants established by developers for specific, privately controlled subdivisions.
In the Spring Glen subdivision in Medina County, Ohio, the minimum heated square footage of houses exclusive of garages, finished basements, porches, etc. Thus, on an expensive lot, homeowners are required to build expensive, and therefore often large, houses.
Appraisals which assess the value of the a house for financial or taxation purposes for small houses also run into difficulty when all the houses in a particular area are very large and the appraiser cannot find small comparable houses. This issue does not apply at the high end of the real estate market, where land values commonly exceed house values.
Examples also exist of both zoning regulations and restrictive covenants on subdivisions that specify maximum house size. Many municipalities effectively limit the footprints of houses on small lots by specifying the maximum coverage of the lot.
This restriction is generally governed by stormwater concerns, but particularly with small infill lots, it can have a big impact on house size. Cupertino, Calif. In the Chicago area the regulations are addressing a trend referred to as mansionization , in which houses are often designed to fill the maximum available footprint of a lot -- overwhelming the neighborhood scale. In the environmentally focused Dewees Island subdivision in South Carolina, maximum house size has been established by covenant at 5, square feet m2.
So is the fact that there are no minimum floor area or footprint requirements. Another influence on house size in the United States has long been capital gains tax policy. Until recently, when an American family sold a house it had to buy a new house of equal or greater value within 2 years to avoid capital gains tax on the appreciated value of the house that was sold.
That policy often resulted in people moving into larger houses, especially empty-nesters moving into areas with lower real estate values. Since that policy changed in , U. Selling the Concept Even without any regulatory or financing impediments to building compact houses, convincing others of their benefits can be challenging.
A different understanding may be reached if the clients focus on their housing needs and expectations. Visiting high-quality, compact houses may also influence their views. It may also be possible to convince clients that, by keeping the square footage down, they can end up with a higher quality house. Rather than using up the budget to create the largest, most impressive house possible, many designers today recommend creating smaller houses with a higher level of finish quality and added amenities.
She argues that a good house designer should suggest to clients that, for a given budget, they reduce square footage to allow high-quality detailing. Fine carpentry detailing, granite countertops, hardwood floors, labor-intensive but soulful salvage materials, and quality architecture can be far more impressive than sheer size. On the regulatory side, remaining zoning ordinances that mandate large houses should be eliminated, and zoning regulations should be revised to prohibit or discourage design standards or covenants in private developments that mandate large houses.
Restrictions in private developments that specify maximum dwelling size should not be prohibited or discouraged. Rather, regulatory incentives should be developed that encourage such restrictions.
Designers, builders, or owners of these houses seek out recycled-content building materials, low embodied- energy materials, or natural materials. Advanced framing techniques reduce wood use. Well-insulated walls and ceilings, high-performance glazings, and efficient equipment reduce energy consumption. But far too often, the more important consideration of size is overlooked. A 1,square-foot m2 house with mediocre energy-performance standards R walls and R ceilings will use far less energy for heating and cooling than a 3,squarefoot m2 house of comparable geometry with much better energy detailing R walls and R ceilings.
And it is easier to reduce the embodied energy of a house by making the house smaller than by searching for low embodied- energy materials. Most modern buildings are designed in ways that are energy efficient. This tends to reduce homeowners energy costs in the long run.
Maintenance costs can be over half the lifetime costs of a home or more. More and more homes are being built with good natural lighting that saves their home owners hundreds or even thousands of dollars on their electricity bills over their lifetimes.
Efficient buildings generally are cheaper to operate and maintain over time. New homes are often constructed with air quality in mind. Better and more air efficient flow is the goal of many new heating and cooling systems. There are systems that can be controlled room by room, so only rooms that are currently used are being served at one time.
Using more natural lighting and solar panels can reduce dependency on artificial light. They also encourage more efficient ways to use energy in the home. Non-renewable energy sources are not only expensive, but they can also harm the environment over time. Finding natural ways to warm and heat homes are great for saving money and providing a cleaner eco footprint. Older homes sometimes have design flaws and problems that can waste large amounts of water.
Newer homes take into account the fact that our water resources are limited in certain areas. Buildings in general consume trillions of gallons of water every year. This allows the homeowners to only use the water they need, and not waste as much. More and more construction companies and remodelers have been using environmentally friendly building materials. They are getting rid of products that have been known to cause cancer, asthma, allergies and other potentially toxic health conditions.
The end result is that homeowners and their families are healthier in these newer homes. It reduces stress and medical costs and improves their overall quality of life. Using eco-friendly products are also good for our environment as a whole. Reducing emissions from coal, wood and other pollutants can help improve our outdoor air quality. It also helps lessen the effects and slow the pace of climate change.
It is very possible for us to use current resources and materials in creating homes that are actually very beneficial for the environment. They create building materials that give off fewer carbon dioxide emissions. Instead of ending up in dumps or landfills, a lot of construction waste can be reused or recycled for other uses.
It also takes less time and energy to transport these materials to be reused or recycled. All of these efforts help make our world a much safer place to live and work every day.
Your email address will not be published. Wake up daily to our latest coverage of business done better, directly in your inbox. Get your weekly dose of analysis on rising corporate activism. By signing up you agree to our privacy policy. You can opt out anytime.
The materials and fuels used to build a new structure also have significant environmental impacts, and new impacts arise once the building is in operation. Do the many economic benefits of new buildings outweigh the environmental harm they can cause? Building new homes attracts customers for local businesses and additional taxes for the local government.
Both residential and commercial buildings bring economic enhancements. It also supports jobs. During peak construction, business activity in the city increased by The economic impacts are expected to continue to grow now that Apple has opened the new facility. Understandably, interest in hosting the new headquarters has been high.
Building a typical two-bedroom house produces around 80 tons of carbon dioxide emissions , which is equal to the emissions of about five new cars. Building bigger buildings, such as commercial and industrial facilities, naturally creates more emissions. Sourcing the materials used and clearing land for homes has significant impacts as well.
Most of the environmental impact of home occurs while people are living in it. Buildings use about 41 percent of the energy in the United States — even more than the industrial and transportation sectors — and also use 14 percent of all drinkable water.
0コメント