Richard Chapman
‘Capital will help’
In what may be considered a strike against the anti-sprawl pitch, a recent survey shows that homebuyers are far more concerned with home size and price than they are about a home’s proximity to work, city or schools.
The survey, cosponsored by the National Association of Home Builders and the National Association of Realtors, was done to provide a better understanding of what drives homebuyers’ decisions in the marketplace.
Given three statements to choose from in the survey, 62 percent indicated their top concern was price, while 31 percent said that finding a home in the right neighborhood was the top priority. Seven percent of the survey respondents said being close to work and minimizing the commute was really important.
The respondents’ preferences are in contrast to what “smart growth” advocates have been pushing for during the last several years – namely hindering sprawl and containing housing development in already developed urban areas near jobs and public transportation.
In fact, when respondents were asked to rate the importance of 16 aspects of a home and its location, “houses spread out” received the highest rating, with 62 percent saying it was an important or very important feature.
The results weren’t so shocking to at least one Bay State planner, who said the answers depend on what types of questions were asked in the survey.
“The biggest message you get from all the polling is, it all depends on what you’re asking people,” said David Dixon, urban design principal with Goody, Clancy & Assoc. in Boston
Dixon said if those same survey respondents were asked whether reducing traffic congestion and commute times, preserving open space and farms, and living close enough to shops so they can walk was important to them, they would say yes to all of them.
“There are a lot of things that people would prefer if they don’t have to think about sprawl,” said Dixon, a board member of the Boston Society of Architects.
If the survey respondents were asked to draw a photo of a home, most would draw a large, single-family detached home in a neighborhood of similar homes, predicted Dixon, because they aren’t aware of other housing options.
The survey questioned 2,000 households that had purchased a primary residence within the past four years. Some 44 percent of the respondents chose highway access as the No. 1 community amenity when they were asked about the importance of 18 different home qualities. In contrast, only 19 percent chose shops within a walking area.
And when they were asked to rank three alternatives for where new growth should occur, most selected building homes in existing, partially developed suburban areas as their top choice, followed by vacant land in the central city or inner suburbs. Some 29 percent selected “build homes in outlying areas” as their first choice, while 26 percent of the respondents had that as their second choice.
Massachusetts homebuilder Finley Perry said it would be easy to look at survey results and say that homebuyers love sprawl, but he said that isn’t the true message of the survey.
“I think it would be a mistake to read into it that people want to drive long distances to go to work,” said Perry. “I think they’re willing to make the tradeoff in order to get the type of housing they want and can afford.”
In the Greater Boston area, for example, buyers who can’t afford a home in a town inside Route 128 and Interstate 495 are heading to farther-away communities west of I-495, said Perry, who is president of the Builders Association of Greater Boston.
Realtors and builders who were told about the survey results wondered whether they reflect the New England market. Boston-area builders have been working with the BSA and the Conservation Law Foundation to determine what surveys like these mean in this region’s marketplace, said Perry.
About a month ago, Dixon, who is heading a Civic Initiative for a Livable New England, a BSA project that focuses on growth in Boston, spoke to BAGB members.
Dixon said builders expressed interest in containing sprawl and finding new markets in which to build. But they were also concerned about building codes and zoning regulations.
Trading Places
Many communities in the Bay State, for example, have passed regulations over the years, such as increasing the minimum acreage per house lot, that make it tougher for homebuilders to construct homes and actually encourage sprawl.
“They [the builders] wanted to know what they could do to access more sites, particularly in the cities,” said Dixon.
The most vocal critics of smart growth argue that current programs too often seem to slam suburban ways of living – single-family homes that are spaced out and force residents to rely on cars to get around.
But according to the survey results, most buyers prefer single-family detached homes that are in pedestrian-friendly neighborhoods with shopping nearby.
“This survey demonstrates that homebuyers are quite conscious of the tradeoffs they make when buying a home,” said NAHB President Gary Garczynski in a press release.
“They are willing to live further from the city in order to have a large home and the quality of the community is more important than the length of the commute. A better understanding of these tradeoffs enables us to develop planning and growth policies that take into account homebuyers’ preferences,” he said.
While Realtor Ralph Miller agreed that price and home size are very important considerations for homebuyers, he said that the primary consideration for most buyers remains location.
“The price and size can be good, but if it’s sitting on Route 128 the house is not going to sell,” said Miller, who is president of the Realty Guild and one of the owners of Hughes & Hughes Real Estate Co. in Natick.
“Location is primarily what buyers are looking for and then they make tradeoffs,” said Miller, whose real estate firm serves 25 communities, including Framingham, Natick and Dover.
About half the buyers Miller encounters choose to move further away from their jobs – and sometimes urban areas – to find a home they can afford and that satisfies their space needs. But an equal number of buyers sacrifice space, choosing smaller homes in more developed areas in exchange for reducing their commute times, he said.
In Greater Boston, where housing prices have skyrocketed over the last five to 10 years, homebuyers increasingly are moving farther away from the city to find housing they can afford, said Realtor Shari Marquis.
The median price for a single-family home in Suffolk County, which includes all of the Boston neighborhoods, Revere, Chelsea and Winthrop, jumped from $117,500 in 1996 to $245,250 in 2001 – a 109 percent increase, according to The Warren Group, parent company of Banker & Tradesman.
Prices for single-family homes in Middlesex County also shot up during the last five years, according to The Warren Group. The median price for a single-family home in 2001 was $305,000, more than 69 percent higher than the $180,000 price seen in 1996.
Marquis, owner of Marquis Real Estate GMAC with offices in Brighton, Plymouth, Wareham and Duxbury, said that she has worked with homebuyers relocating to Massachusetts who started their housing searches in Boston suburbs but eventually turned to other, more remote communities where housing prices are much lower.
“In Boston, we’re driven by the prices,” said Marquis.
