Vacation in place: what if our primary houses lived like our second homes?

Residential Architect, July, 2003 by S. Claire Conroy

Who doesn't love a vacation house? Lots of windows framing beautiful views; a diverse and often bold palette of materials; and, best of all, a relaxed floor plan that wastes almost no space. Frankly, second homes are often more architecturally successful than primary residences. Seems a little wrongheaded, no? Shouldn't our first homes treat us so well?

Of course, inviting vistas are harder to come by in city and suburban dwellings, but clever materials and more useable, efficient floor plans shouldn't be. Why are we weighted down by so many superfluous bedrooms, bathrooms, and basements? Part of the blame goes to the pervasive notion that you must build to the value of the lot and the comparables of the area. Most custom home clients choose upscale neighborhoods. Once they've made that commitment, the theory goes, they can't build something weirder or smaller than the neighbors' houses. And, voila, they and you are trapped in the dull status quo.

Why does the second home dodge this snare? There are a couple of reasons, I suspect. For one, vacation home buyers are not as indentured by resale conventions (a minimum of four bedrooms, three baths, please). In fact, many imagine themselves retiring to that house one day, so they'll risk building their dream house no-holds-barred. Those rooms-for-resale disappear in favor of space they'll really savor. Another reason is financial: Quite a few clients are cashing in equity on their first homes to pay for their second ones. Having a substantial down payment in hand makes them less vulnerable to those narrow-minded comparables that are gospel for mortgage loan officers.

Comparables: They are the devil's appraisal system-because they take into account only quantity of rooms, not quality. Say your client wants a two-bedroom, two-bath house with one big, hardworking room for kitchen, living, dining, office. The house might consume only 2,000 square feet, but with its open floor plan, beautiful materials, and custom craftsmanship, it would live like 5,000. Chances are, however, the bank will appraise it like the dinky two-bedroom Cape Cod in the same zip code. If your clients need heavy leverage and favorable interest rates to get into the house, this is a major problem. Even if they can get themselves in, they may fret they can't get back out if they need to, without taking a big financial hit. It's a huge obstacle to putting the middle class into interesting housing.

What we really need is a more enlightened banking system--one with two sets of books for merchant-built housing vs. custom homes. We need knowledgeable appraisers, ones who don't just run the neighborhood comps and count the number of bedrooms and bathrooms on your plans. On the local level, you and your chapter organizations can help by cultivating relationships with banks and loan officers. On the national level, we need the clout of AIA National, the National Association of Home Builders, and the National Association of Realtors to raise the public consciousness of what really makes a good house. Maybe we wouldn't crave a second home so badly if our primary residences let us vacation in place.

Questions or comments? Call me: 202.736.3312; write me: S. Claire Conroy, residential architect, One Thomas Circle, N.W., Suite 600, Washington, D.C. 20005; or e-mail me: cconroy@hanley-wood.com.