Two I Like

In the last week, there were price cuts on 2 houses I really like. The first (at left) is a 2 bedroom + den lakefront cottage at Wolf Lake north of Wurtsboro. (GHVMLS 473539) The place is just adorable, and has that whole cozy lake cottage thing going for it. The asking price has dropped to $369,500, an the owner has indicated that at that price it will be a short sale. Short sales can be tricky and require the patience of Job, but they can yield a pretty good deal for a buyer prepared to navigate the short sale waters. And there is the possibility that the seller's lender won't approve the short sale. Wolf is a very pretty non-motorboat lake, and owners at Wolf Lake have private use of 1,500 surrounding community acres.

The second price reduction that caught my eye is a 4 bedroom, 1 1/2 bath, 1,800 sq. ft. farmhouse on 4.45 acres on Swiss Hill Road between Jeffersonville and Bethel Woods. (SCMLS 24738)This house was originally priced at $299,000, and the owners have made a number of price reductions, and it's now at $229,000. When it was at $249,000 over the summer it was one of my "Best Value" picks. Frankly, this is one I'm very surprised hasn't sold. It's consistently a house I find a pleasure to show. I particularly like the 1950's Ozzie and Harriett kitchen.

Is the house perfect? No. The enclosed front porch detracts from the classic lines. (In my opinion, whoever buys it should bring it back to an open rocking chair porch.) The kitchen could be opened up to the dining room, and possibly two of the second floor bedroom could be combined into a master suite. But none of this needs to be done to enjoy the house.

The house does sit on a corner parcel, and some folks I've shown it to thought it was too "exposed". But we're talking the corner of Swiss Hill and Birch Ridge roads, for heavens sake. The two charmers on CR93 in Fremont Center that sold earlier this year (in the same price range) had more road impact than this house. This house on Swiss Hill has very gentle fields around it, and I think would be great for kids.

Comments

[mary ellen]

David, I agree with you that the house would look better with an open porch. Both our houses had open porches, but no one ever went out there for years (bugs, heat, cold)When my Dad enclosed both porches, we were out there all the time, and now the porches are everyone's favorite place to be. They don't look as classic, but an enclosed porch with giant windows all around will be used more often. At least it was that way with our family.If the above house had a nice wood door to the entry it would look better than the aluminum one.

[ar]

Dave's narrative on the Jeff house reaches the point of a desperate pitch; I'm guessing somebody leaned on him for some serious help on this house. Indeed the price is remarkable for what is offered, and the fact that the prices has come this low and the house is still unsold speaks volumes about how hard the market has crashed. Anybody want to catch a falling knife?

[David Knudsen]

Nobody leaned on me at all to pitch that house. When I post something on here as something I like, or I think is a good value, it's solely my opinion.

[Helen]

In my opinion, they are both overpriced by 50%.

Dave, how much did you spend for your house on those gorgeous 30 acres?

[Newton]

Yeah ar.

Lay off Dave and your negativity about the Swish Hill farmhouse... the owners are going to take a hit at 229k for what they origianlly paid for it. Oh my!

I heard that a MicroCottage in Highland is being offered for only $195,000! How many square is in a MicrCottage?

708 square feet!

Where do you put your guests for the night?

Newton

[ar]

But Newton, the MicroCottage is "authentic" -- you pay extra for that. Seriously, the Jeff house almost certainly can be picked off for $210K or even less, for which you get a REAL old house, w/ 4 bedrooms on five acres. Only masterful marketing could sucker somebody into paying the same for a 1-br "cottage" with new construction taxes totaling as much or more than the Swiss Hill house taxes. The market in SC has not merely crashed; it's the Twilight Zone.

[David Knudsen]

Helen, it seems like no matter what I post on here, you'll come back with "It's overpriced by 50%." — without really considering the positioning of the house on the market, who it's likely to appeal to and other houses that mya be similar.

ar, the builder of the cottages you refer to (and regularly disparage) must be doing something right, since they're selling and he's one of the only builders in this downturn who keeps building houses that people buy. And anytime somebody buys, or considers buying, something that doesn't fit your criteria of value, you disparage them as "suckers" or lambs being helplessly led to slaughter by predatory Realtors. Buyers are much more intelligent and savvier than you give them credit for. The bottom line is that there are different strokes for different folks. There is absolutely a market for those new construction cottages — buyers who want an easy care house with some hip charm, and absolutely don't want the hassle of an older house. Many of them also want smaller houses. When there's no demand for those houses, that builder will stop building them.

You should really become a spokeperson for Microsoft, so you can star on television commercials slamming the Mac. Less powerful, smaller drives, fewer programs and more expensive to boot. Why in the world would anyone buy a Mac? When you can get twice as much Windows machine for half the money. Of that particular builder, I've often commented that he's the Apple of new construction, building stylish objects that trendsters desire will pay a premium for.

[Nest Dweller]

Something else that ar and Newton also fail to recognize is the MicroCottage's niche market. He's building specifically with NYC 2nd-homers in mind. As David said, these are people that would love a "REAL" old house, but haven't the time or patience for all the renovations/upkeep that such a house demands. Do they pay a premium? Of course they do. But that premium is worth it to them... these people are not the knuckleheads you crack them up to be.

I've walked through a number of this builder's homes and I'm constantly impressed with his build quality and attention to detail. And I know for a fact he stands by his work. Because you have a personal problem with him doesn't lessen the fact that he's doing great business. He's brought $22M in new house sales to a depressed area with a slumping market. Nevermind that his product works well with the vernacular of the area. Am I a fan? You bet... he's only increasing my property value with every house he builds.

[mary ellen]

My "real" old house needed a new well, electrical work, a new oil tank, plumbing leaks fixed, the hay cut, trees removed, a new cover for the spillway, floors replaced, interior painted, more gravel on the road, and the list goes on and on, (and this was just last summer!)

There are MANY days I wish I had a tidy new Microcottage instead of my 2 lovely geezer 100-year-old farmhouses.

Not everyone wants to play "This Old House" in real life-they just want the feeling of a farmhouse, a non-city vibe. Nobody has to 'marketing mastermind' anyone to buy a new small cottage-they know the headaches that come with maintaining older houses.

Before someone tells me what an idiot I am to have these homes, I did not buy these houses-they're a family place, but the upkeep is just as tough.I understand the city couple who wants to side-step the fix-up.

[Whitman]

==================================

~~~~~QUOTE OF THE DAY ~~~~~~~~

"...these are people that would love a "REAL" old house, but haven't the time or patience for all the renovations/upkeep that such a house demands. Do they pay a premium? Of course they do. But that premium is worth it to them... these people are not the knuckleheads you crack them up to be."
==================================

Well, I'll be!

The MicroCottage®

The hip urbanite comes up to Sullivan and now pays more - for even less!

Whitman

[bluelite]

How much does Catskill Farms sell those home for? Nest mentions $22MM and CP mentions building 55 homes which would mean an average selling price of $400,000. I can't imagine those homes selling for that average but maybe I am wrong. Perhaps someone is wrong with their volume/revenue facts?

[Nest Dweller]

I stand corrected... per his website, said builder has brought in $15M in sales, not the $22M I erroneously reported. (that's an average of 273k per house.) Nice catch, bluelite... my bad.

Whitman: Here's a challenge to you...

1. Find a small, authentic farmhouse on five or so acres in Sullivan County with a ton of charm
2. Renovate it to the level and quality of a CP home. That'll probably mean a new heating system, new plumbing, new electrical, new windows and maybe even work on the structural integrity of the home. Oh, don't forget new cabinets and appliances in the ratty old kitchen you're likely to find in your "real" house. Plus new paint, refinished floors, etc, etc, etc.
3. Do it all in four months time (which is how long it takes CP to build a home from a wooded lot. Good luck even finding the contractors to do all this in Sullivan, never mind in a four-month time frame. But hey, that's part of the challenge.)
4. Add up all your receipts.
5. After you realize you've easily outspent the cost of the comparable CP house, eat a healthy portion of crow.

More for less? I say more for more. And if these houses are such a joke, then how come the builder is selling them before he even finishes them? Oh, yeh... 'cuz them city folks is sooooooo stoopid.

[Martin Sorrell]

Love our MicroCottage®!

=======================

At 708 square feet, we find our MicroCottage® to be the perfect cozy love abode to cuddle with your significant other sipping hot chocolate on those oh so cold Catskill winters.

New item this season!

~~~~~~~~~~
***TIK®***
~~~~~~~~~~

TIK® is our new low maintenance brainchild that we kind of ripped off from our former digs on Avenue B and Rivington.

We doff our hats to Mies van der Rohe who said that "less is more". Amen Mies.

With TIK® you'll find that you won't have to leave the kitchen when entertaining and cooking for your guests.

TIK® {Tub in Kitchen} will make you cityfolks feel very much at home.

Available in a palette of your liking: Charcoal Black, Winter White or Blazing Blue.

Right now is a great time to buy and our models are quickly going...going...going!

------------------------------------------------------------------------
MicroCottage® and TIK® - we're feeding your dream...one house at a time®

©2009

[CF]

The difference between the $15m and $22m is the difference between our in-house original-designed 'spec' home sales and the revenue we've generated by building designs brought to us. Both correct, just measuring different community investments.

But, David, comparing us to Apple - now that's a real compliment. Much appreciated. I'm sure anyone would be flattered with that coming from a wet-blanket like yourself (just joking).

[bluelite]

Nest,

The $273K seems more reasonable but still seems high relative to construction cost. If you take $40K off for land then you are paying around $200 per sq. ft. assuming a 1,200 sq. ft. house. The builders cost is somewhere in the low $100's so his profit is roughly 50% of the sale price. I'll bet they are not paying $40K for land so the profit is even higher.

You seem like you are a CF owner. Take your square footage and divide it into your cost after subtracting some reasonable number for land. That is what you paid them for construction. The link below shows you the median and average construction cost per sq. ft. and you will see the low $100's I am referencing. Understand there are some economies of scale with larger homes where costs are spread out and the average per sq. ft. can be lower but it should give you an idea of how much a builder makes on your home.

Enjoy your home.

http://www.nahb.org/fileUpload_details.aspx?contentID=80055

[bluelite]

Dave,
I did a drive by on 24738 and I did not like the corner lot situation and lack of privacy (no trees). I would be afraid if my children were playing in the yard because there is no real backyard. I don't care if the road is not heavily traveled. I also saw the two charmers and while they are on a busier road, they do have a true backyard where the kids could play.

Also, do you think the mobile home across the street distracts from the value?

[Nick]

"2. Renovate it to the level and quality of a CP home."

By which you mean knock it down with a bulldozer and build it again so it kinda sorta has some elements of classic old houses but not really and it doesn't take a trained eye to see the differences clearly.

I think there's nothing wrong with the "CP" thing for those that like it, clearly some do. But I'll take my 112 year old house and every square inch of history that is quite literally impossible to replicate at any price.

Your points are all valid, don't get me wrong. Old houses are a commitment. But after getting to step 5 in your list you'd still have the "authentic" you started with in step one. Buying new means a new house. A new house that in the examples in question I've seen has "old-looking" details, sometimes very incongruously applied. Reminds me of those jeans you see at high end department stores with holes and stains already.

I guess you have to decide how much you value authentic. Some consider it quite valuable. Indeed, a prerequisite.

[ar]

Nick hits the point exactly with his analogy to instant "old" jeans. Another comparison would be this -- the "new old" house is like the reproduction furniture from the Bombay chain. Of course everything comes down to personal taste, but I just find it laughable that "authenticity" can be literally manufactured out of sheer marketing hype. The irony is that Dave smugly celebrates as "hip" something that epitomizes phoniness -- "authenticity" manufactured four months ago to mimic an antique. Mimicry, Dave, is the OPPOSITE of what Apple does -- your Windows/Apple joke misses the point entirely.

[Nest Dweller]

Bluelite:

Not be argumentative, but I am NOT a CF home owner. I did, however, build a new house in Yulan in 2005. We went with a different local builder (I wasn't familiar with CF and his work at the time.) In the end, we paid about $175/square foot. Our builder did a good job... not a great one, but a good one. They built a decent house and we're happy with the end product. That said, they stubbornly refused to go an extra mile on any count. Part of that was because they were in the midst of the former building boom and spread too thin; the other part is because they just aren't that kind of builder. They build good, basic homes and that's that.

If another $25/square foot would have gotten us all the extras that CF automatically puts into his homes, we would have gladly paid it. (Our builder, who isn't accustomed to such things and doesn't have access to the right suppliers, would have easily charged us double that.) Further, it would have been worth it to have been dealing with a builder with an eye for architecture and vernacular, and intent on building something more than just a house.

Yes, I'm a fan of CF's work. And if you aren't, that I understand, too. (Nick has a very valid - and well-put - point above, for example.) I just don't feel the personal assault he takes from some posters is warranted. No matter the economics and personal tastes involved, he builds a nice house and is bringing much needed business into the area.

[CF]

The problem with Bluelites logic is the very fundamental economic fact - that if anyone was making 50% of sales price, there would be a lot more people doing it. Business people rush to profit - in fact, every wild-eyed speculator would rush to that red herring of an 'opportunity'.

"Authentic" can be defined many ways. Our customers find it an 'authentic' country experience to be able to enjoy their home (have friends over, show off to their parents) from the day they close, not 4 years and lots of budget-busting, life-changing, had-to-become-a-construction expert experiences. In fact, our customers are smart enough to know what they don't want in a getaway - lots of problems and stress - i.e., the exact definition of fixing up a wreck of a house - the only choice they had before we introduced our new old homes in 2004. There is no doubt Nick is entitled to his air of superiority - he's earned it through the school of hard-knocks I'm sure - I've seen what it's like to renovate an old house on a budget from 2 hours away. Another full-time job at a minimum.

Anyways, it's not news to anyone that some people like the romance of older homes. I've only lived in renovated old houses since I moved up here in 2002 - and it reinforces my opinion that most people/families/homeowners don't belong in an old house - It's one problem after another, even though I stripped it down to the studs and installed new everything. It's too close to the road, the studs are too thin to get enough insulation, the well is too close to the septic, the local bats know where the house is, it get swarmed with ladybugs for some reason - the house has a memory, and not all of them are good.

What was true at the beginning our start of our business and remains more so today, that our best clients are the most educated ones - the ones who have spent a yr of weekends looking in the Berkshires, Woodstock, Delhi - it's a depressing, uninspiring quest for something reasonably priced that has any inkling of style. Any time some one writes to us or stops by and says 'we've been looking forever', I know we got a live one - because in the end, the buyers define value (not the posters on this site) and they have overwhelmingly decided that what we offer has value.

[Nest Dweller]

PS:

Bluelite - Again, not be argumentative, but I just got a chance to take a look at the link you provided and I think the figures are a little optimistic... well, at least the 2005 figures are. We got several bids to build our place and none came even close to the $110/sq. ft. your chart suggests. Dave, can you back me up on this one?

[David Knudsen]

NAHB average cost numbers tend to be on the low side for this area, for a couple of reasons. First, they are based on an "improved lot" --- which means with electric, water, sewer and an accessible building site, e.g. a suburban 'ready to build' lot. On rural property, tree clearing, driveways, wells, septics and trenching in electric, phone and cable aren't included in those per square foot costs. On a 5 acre wooded parcel, those infrastructure costs can range from $15,000 to $30,000. They also don't vary substantially with the size of a house. Doing perc tests and engineering a septic plan could run $2,000 whether a house is 1,000 sq. ft. or 3,000 sq. ft. And the septic for a larger house has a larger leach field, but the other parts are pretty similar.

Also, the vast majority of the houses that contribute to the NAHB figures are developer tract houses --- those 2,500 sq. ft. vinyl sided two stories that builders churn out. Many people think that the bulk of new construction is Toll Brother's style McMansions with high end fit and finishes, but the reality is that most are far more affordable "builder colonials" with lower end finishes. Smaller houses, and houses with natural or higher end finishes are more expensive on a per square foot basis.

I have one other comment about this argument about "authenticity" and "reproductions." I don't see the argument. People gravitate to different house narratives that reflect their aspirations. Some people like a more Norman Rockwell feel, others more Phillipe Starck. Crate and Barrel or Room and Board are no more "authentic" than Bombay Company. They knock off modern design just like Bombay Company (until they went bankrupt) knocked off British Empire colonialism.

[JD]

Hello David:

I’ve been following your blog for more than a year now, and am grateful for the time and effort you put into it. Thank you. This particular blog and the subsequent comments really caught my attention enough for me to want to add to the exchange.

I am one of those “suckers” from NYC who purchased a cottage from CF. To put it quite simply, my partner and I LOVE our new home, and if we had to do it over again, we would.

We came up to SC in January 2008 house hunting. We knew nothing about the area but were intrigue by its bucolic reputation. We spent hours, days, weeks, researching properties. Finally, my partner and I looked at more than 50 houses within our price range ($300 - $350K). The first house (315K): To be kind, it was filthy, old and in need of at least $50,000 in upgrades and repairs. There was no view except another dilapidated across the road. They were also asking for a monthly maintenance fee for pool usage (neighbors had the right of way to walk across the property as well). The pool looked like it had not been touched since it was built in the ‘60s. The second house…pretty much ditto, though his one had a garage, but the door was permanently sealed because they built a room so that the new wall ended approximately a few feet from the garage door. Weird! The third, fourth and fifth houses that we looked at… ditto, ditto, ditto, even when we looked at homes above our price range..

We were just about to give up and literally ready to throw in the towel when we drove by CF, Cottage 1. We asked the realtor to stop and tell us about the house. She told us about CF. After several e-mail exchanges with CP, we met him and several months later we signed on. This was after speaking with current CF owners who were very happy with their purchase. Those people we interviewed, by the way, seemed pretty authentic and absolutely kind: artists, writers, doctors, employed in our schools of education, etc.

I come from New England where homes are very, very old. Farmhouses in need of renovations are best left for those who have a ton of money to fix them up, patience, and time. They are just not practical. Moreover, if I was to ask one of those farmers who had built their home many years ago that if they had a choice between the house that they built or a CF house, I bet you they would choose the latter.

[CF]

To ar's point - the fact that he has it all wrong - again - should surprise no one. The goal our of homes is to merge individual taste, historical influences, and modern conveniences. There is very little attempt to be authentic, in the purist sense. Original, yes. Pure authenticity, no.

I mean, what is authentic about ripping apart an old house and putting all new materials in it? Sure, you got the sloped floors and drafty windows, and weird layouts - but other than that, most gut renovations entail ripping out most of what is authentic - the horse hair plaster, the caked on linoleum, the cracked ceiling and knob and tube electric, lead plumbing pipes, trims, floors, sometimes even the roof rafters, paper for insulation, and basements that flood. All that goes to the dump.

The idea of a new old house is simple - the house has a unique flavor, and it works. And that is a nice option for many people looking for a getaway.

But, in the end, ar's words are mostly flattering, since he is crediting us with being able to successfully market 'air' in the middle of the biggest real estate bust in memory. By any measure, that's impressive.

[David Knudsen]

Just an FYI --- I've not posted through a couple of comments about building costs, specifically attempting to reverse engineer CP's building costs and profit margin by extrapolating from the NAHB data, and essentially putting him on the spot to defend his pricing. I don't think that's fair, to put any businessperson on the spot to essentially divulge their cost of doing business.

A good analogy would be a restaurant. In Manhattan, you have a choice of $20 entree restaurants, of $30 ones or even $50 ones nowadays. When you go to a $30 entree restaurant, you either see the value for yourself, based on what you want, or you don't and go somewhere else. You don't go to the chef and say either "You know, the average cost of a restaurant meal in the northeast if $14.15, so your entree --- even with the higher cost of doing business in Manhattan - shouldn't cost more than $18." You also don't ask the chef to divulge the cost of the ingredients in your dish because you won't buy any restaurant food where the cost of ingredients isn't a certain percentage of the gross costs.

The same thing with a Catskill Farms house. Nobody forces anybody to buy one. You want something cheaper, go buy something else. If NAHB says the average for new construction is $116 or whatever a square foot, go buy one of those houses. Just like I have a choice in Manhattan to go to WD50 on Clinton Street and shell out $31 for a duck breast entree or go to Olive Garden.

[bluelite]

Dave,

I just lost a lot of faith in your impartiality. I learned a lot about where your motives are. Will you at least let me comment on the gross versus net margin? My post that was discarded mentioned that I rounded up a little to the 50% margin posted. I apologized for that but I wanted to point out to CF that I was talking about a gross margin (revenue less cost of goods sold) and that in practice can easily be in the mid 40’s to the mid 50’s. CF incorrectly translated that into a net margin and of course a net margin in the mid 40’s is unsustainable.

I was not trying to disparage anyone’s business model. In fact, I am all for maximizing profits.

Thank you.

[David Knudsen]

bluelite, I let most comments go well into the stratosphere. But I cut this one off because of where it was going, defending a business model. It's not being partial or impartial. Nothing generates more comments on here than anything that touches on Catskill Farms. Keep in mind this thread didn't start out with that.

If you're a potential buyer of one of his houses, do your due diligence and decide whether you want to buy one or not at the price he's charging. But I do get tired on here of the armchair pundits who look for the opportunity to drag Catskill Farms into some discussion. The reason I squelched your comment and another similar one was that it would put Chuck in a position of either defending his business model his cost structure, or if he chooses not to, then it seems like he's hiding something. It's not a position I want to put him, or any other business person, in.

Frankly, I don't think you have any more right to put him in that position than to ask a restaurant owner to justify his prices. You don't like the prices, don't pay 'em. End of story.

[CF]

David, thank you for the editorial discretion. We make money, no doubt, but a lot of that money is through a very efficient business structure, overhead structure and vertical integration.

I don't have to tell you how many gamblers have attempted to copy our homes and reap the rumored exorbitant profits - to much fanfare but little success.

To be honest, if I can lower my prices by $10,000 and still make enough money to run a business and all of its associated costs in the state of NY, I would do it every single time (in fact, do it every chance I get), because anyone who has had any experience with real estate will tell you more sales (cash flow) is worth twice it's weight than bloated margins. And without debate, every time you find a way to offer a less expensive but no less detail oriented product, you gain more buyers, and continue to exist in this business climate.

[Nick]

Now there's no need to read words in that aren't written. "Air of superiority" is a pretty loaded statement, which is certainly a stretch from what I said. Yes I think my approach is "superior" but FOR ME of course. Trust me, I know very well exactly why someone might want turnkey. Doing it the other way, in my case, has led to a seemingly never-ending series of things to deal with. Some may not want that. Ironically for me personally my father is one of them, he also has a place in SC that was so turnkey they left the furniture and the pots and pans. For full disclosure his house is over 100 years old too, but so renovated it really might as well be brand new. I thought he was crazy, but having gone through the process now I see how he might have picked up some wisdom in his additional years. Well and he's 5 hours away, not in NYC like I am. Then again I still wouldn't trade if given the option.

Different strokes. People do buy those jeans with the holes in them I have to assume, they keep making them. Eye of the beholder and so on.

And it also HAS to depend on your priorities. I've posted here a bunch so regular readers might find this redundant, but my situation isn't totally typical. First, I didn't just buy an old house, I bought one that had drastic water damage and needed a partial gut renovation of sections of the house, most notably the kitchen. It was beyond just the usual "we'll need to deal with that at some point" old house thing. Secondly my wife is an architect. That mattered a lot, a whole lot. Getting the high end appliances at 40% off and custom built mahogany cabinets for the price of off the rack home center is non-trivial. To-the-trade prices were a real big deal. As was the broader conceptual idea that someone who's professional living is based on the building trades and design (even if it happens to be mostly office buildings for the day job) might take some serious pleasure in the design process as well as being able to design for themselves for once in their lives. And just practically speaking being able to work up professional blueprints and renderings for a renovation loan at no cost rather than hiring an architect mattered quite a bit. I'm sure a carpenter or furniture maker would look at things differently too for similar reasons.

And from my end I really enjoy the work. Some view it as a detraction from their weekend experience. I consider it the attraction. Every Thursday and Friday I get a little excited thinking about what project I'm going to knock out over the weekend. Some people who spend very busy lives at a desk and in the city would like nothing more than dead calm and quiet. Sometimes I feel like I'm wasting away matrix-style and a weekend spent cutting lumber to build a nice trash shed or even sanding floors makes me feel human again. Go to sleep tired, wake up sore. Use power tools. Love it.

It's tough, I see the flip side. A lot of my "projects" have been those ones where you didn't know you had a project and the end looks like the beginning. Like when an upstairs shower is sending gallons of water streaming down a wall cavity into the basement. Two weekends of hard labor later, tiles have been chipped out, cement board properly patched, everything regrouted. It feels great inside to have successfully figured it out and done it and made it look as good as a pro job. But I had what looked like a perfectly good shower at the beginning and after all that work it looks exactly the same. Not too hard to figure out why someone might wanna skip that whole fire drill.

But to get to some kind of point, I just couldn't have it any other way. The adjective of choice is "authentic" which isn't bad. I've got lots of authentic. Sorry but the quirks and can't be replicated. From any vantage point, from the uneven/wavy view through the 100 year old glass of the windows, to the wear and patina of the stone fireplace and exposed brick chimney, to the entire property line bounded by mossy rubble stone walls that are referenced in the original deed back to construction, there's no way to fake it, and every person that comes up can tell the difference, even if they can't put their finger on exactly why. The word isn't so much "authentic" -- what the hell does that mean anyways -- but the word I like is "history." Old houses live and breathe it. The height marks faintly visible on the inside of a closet that a kid grew up in during the 70's. The places where you can see how the original 1897 structure was clearly modified around 1930 or so. That stuff can't be faked by any builder who doesn't own a flux capacitor. It's my choice, everyone's got one.

Now my "criticism" of the Catskill Farms style is specific. And it's not really criticism, it's a highly subjective aesthetic preference. My issue -- for me, again -- is the fact that it's neither here nor there. All the stuff about old houses I describe above is one perspective. Another is new/modern. I wouldn't buy one, but there is modern architecture (and by modern I mean "contemporary" more than the technical definition of "modern") that I find absolutely breathtaking. I wouldn't do the Dwell Magazine style thing myself, but I see the appeal of the genre.

What I find bothersome (personally, yet again) about the CF aesthetic is an unwillingness to commit. There's the repro mentality. There's no reason you can't build a Victorian house tomorrow. It's just wood and nails and all that. You can even use modern systems under the skin, like LVL instead of beams, or PEX instead of copper pipes. What's the difference inside a wall?

The thing that makes me flinch a little is wherever I see what I've dubbed the "Disney" touch. That's when you take things that have an old "vibe" but use them in a way that doesn't correspond to anything. A classic example would be using something llke a salvaged sliding barn door to separate a living room and dining room. Or my ultra pet peeve, using faux beams that look massive but are clearly not structural, just from plain sight, like some 20" lentils scattered over the openings of non load-bearing walls in a single story house, with nary a post to be seen. It's just weird looking to me. Giant beams weren't decorative, they were to carry heavy loads, when my eye can see instantly that they're not carrying anything it just freaks me out. I dunno, that "what the hell is that giant piece of wood doing exactly" thing is a particular sticking point for me. Maybe it's my little quirk.

But there's no such thing as "new old houses" any more than there's "hot cold showers." Using actual meaning of words works just fine I would think. That makes them "new houses" as far as I can tell. They could be "traditional" or "retro" or "period reproduction" new houses. But old is a word that has a definition. Just like the word "history" which goes with it. I think new houses have a lot of great things you can say about them. But "old" isn't one of those things. And some people like the real "old" and not the marketing term "old" and I'm one of them. That doesn't make me superior. It's a question of tastes, and it requires having a taste for other stuff too, like regularly having to fix stuff. Like I said, it's highly personal. But it's a trade off, and for some, like me but plenty of others too, it's not a hard decision, as I said, it's a prerequisite.

And PS - what the hell IS with the ladybugs? I have 'em too. A lot of them, inexplicable. Have you figured that out yet? How bizarre...

[CF]

A New Old House is not a complicated idea nor a Catskill Farms original term - it is defined by attempting to lift architecture out of the mundane suburban box by respecting designs and construction approaches from the past. It's not a complicated concept - like green building, it implies thinking while building, instead of the defaulting to the carpet-vinyl siding-oak cabinet special crowding America's landscape.

In the end the goal is to insert personality and soul into new construction without making the homes unaffordable- a difficult endeavor for sure.