Seen on a drive through an east Sacramento neighborhood recently. Apparently, the homeowner wanted to make it even taller (amazing that the city allowed this to begin with…). The neighbors "talked him down" (ouch, bad pun, sorry). Note that it will be the tallest structure within several blocks, and is totally and completely out of character with the rest of the neighborhood – every single house on this street is a modest bungalow on a relatively small lot.
I noticed the owner kept the electricity connected and the front porch light on; maybe he’s worried that a low-flying plane might hit it.
It will be interesting to see how the project turns out!
are you sure they didn’t just raise it that high temporarily while excavating for a foundation? i’ve seen that in my neighborhood. they come back down, afterwards.
i’m envious — i have a post & pier foundation that i need to level after 91 years of differential settlement!
Yes, we talked to the neighbors – it’s only dropping a foot or so from that height, and will be far higher than anything else in the neighborhood. i think they did convince him to bring down the height slightly, but only slightly. it’ll still stick out quite a bit.
While I’ve seen them move entire houses here in Reno – in one case moving a historical building to the South of town in the 70s and them back to where it originally stood when the neighboorhood was rehabed a few years ago, I’ve never seen a house so pardon my pun – jacked up. I can’t believe the city let them raise it that high!
to be honest, i’ve considered this for my own house. it’s a 960sqft 1915 “sedate bungalow” (as i call it because it has the lines, but not the detail). the floor plan is congenial, and doesn’t lend itself to expansion.
it sits on a quite high post & pier foundation — my crawlspace is high enough to kneel in some places. an alternative to bastardizing it for expansion, would be for me to raise it a few (more) feet and excavate a full foundation for a finished basement — any bedrooms on that level would be legal in that they would have egressable windows above ground level.
what’s keeping me from doing that however, is a combination of 2 things: 1. the cost of the project would price my home out of my market (yes, i live in a suburb 30 miles north of seattle, where $300,000 homes are a rarity) but more importantly:
2. it would no longer be … quaint. it would be totally out of style. at that point i may as well change it’s adornment to be a foursquare. i bought a small house because i wanted a small house. i’m making improvements to make it a flat/level/square/nicely appointed small house, but i still want the simplicity and self-discipline of having limited space.
to see a project like this is worrysome from this regard. does the owner have 6 children to accommodate? or is this a matter of a stunt to ‘maximize the lot’ for resale value?
and here’s a contrarian perspective: is it better to do this than to tear-down and built a multi-unit, or something entirely inappropriate for the neighborhood?
Mike, from what I understand, the owner intends the home to be a multigenerational family house – for himself, his many kids, maybe his parents, although that last part I’m not sure about. So he certainly has a practical reason for the expansion. I was gratified to hear that the neighbors recently worked with him to find a way for the house to accommodate his needs while at the same time not being a blight on the neighborhood. That’s hard in this area, where the lots are often very small, and the step back and up from the curb is relatively uniform.
that’s great to hear then. i forgot to list #3 in my reasons why i won’t lift my house — i would block one of my neighbor’s view of the mountains. i would expect them to fight back against that, and i would completely understand. my hope is that my hard work increases the value of both my home, and my neighbors homes (not the contrary).
At least he has a legit reason for expansion (large family) – that makes it a little less of an eyesore for me.