Mark Monday, April 14, 2008

Architecture

Renovation Right: 1014 West Cabarrus

Click Image for Slideshow 
This renovation of a historic structure in historic Boylan Heights, at the western edge of Downtown Raleigh, lies just north of the Dorothea Dix property.  Renovated by Alphin Design/Build, the modifications were made under a watchful eye from the Raleigh Historic Districts Commission.

This project is an excellent example of how a zoning ordinance update won’t adversely affect property values.  This adaptation keeps many of the original details, respecting the 1924 structure, but makes some very well detailed kitchen and bathroom updates, and adds many custom crafted built-ins.  Also, the house achieves Energy Star certification, punking down the naysayers who argue old buildings need to go because they can’t be as ‘green’ as new ones.  (Take a look at the only LEED Platinum building in North Carolina—a historic structure.)  The result of 1014 West Cabarrus is a carefully crafted renovation, which far exceeds the quality of most newly built houses on the market, but has authentic historic charm which can never be achieved by new construction.

Boylan Heights is recognized as a historic district.  This protects the buildings there from demolition or drastic alteration without proper approval from the city.  Certainly this preserves the character, variety, consistency, and integrity of such established and matured neighborhoods.  However, there are many matured and established neighborhoods in Raleigh do not have these regulations to help govern their evolution of place.  Where do we draw the line between what is worth protection from being torn down and sent to the landfill, and what is not?  In this century, the answer to that question is much more involved than deciding historical significance.

Original House

Bookmark: del.icio.us Favicon Digg Favicon Google Favicon LinkedIn Favicon Reddit Favicon StumbleUpon Favicon

Read More: Architecture, Other posts by Mark.

Filed Under:

  • Spiro04/14 03:14 PM

    This is an interesting and attractive update to what looks like a pretty worn out structure.

    Your article, though, gives no information to support your claim that increased zoning regulations will not adversely affect property values.

    How about some more facts?


    Spiro

  • Betsy04/14 08:45 PM

    Mark did not make a general claim that “increased zoning regulations will not adversely affect property values.” 

    Mark only said that this project is “an excellent example of how a zoning ordinance update won’t adversely affect property values.”  He only claims that this particular regulation is a success.

  • robin04/15 02:09 AM

    Nice.  Thanks for the photo tour.

  • Carol04/15 11:01 AM

    We have been watching this one. The floors are beautiful heart pine, either original or salvaged from a similar aged property. It happens to be for sale at 465K. I hope they get it.

    http://www.realtor.com/search/listingdetail.aspx?zp=27603&ml=3&typ=1&pfbm=40&sid=f30ad75258314d4e819abe542c047353&pg=1&lid=1097217498&lsn=7&srcnt=341#Detail

  • Elizabeth04/15 04:06 PM

    Thanks for the post on this beautiful rehab. It is nice to see some positive coverage of what can be done with our older homes (as opposed to bemoaning their loss). We should be pointing to those who lead by example. Older homes have value - in quality of construction, thoughtfulness of design,  and livability of neighborhoods - let’s celebrate them.

  • Rusty04/15 06:44 PM

    Good stuff. It’s a welcome change to see a little contextual response without being cheesy, and a little modernism without turning one’s back on the neighborhood.

    I wish them the best on the sale… Having bought it at 175k and then to put it up at 465k is a massive return on investment in just three years… It’d be cool to see additional “before” photos.

  • Samuel04/15 10:46 PM

    Take a lot. We have a High Victorian website full of Ideas. We are Nationally Registerd Historic District in Elmira NY. http://www.HistoricNearWestside.com Keep up the W O R K

  • Jess04/16 01:21 AM

    Hi Rusty,

    It’s actually a pretty small return on investment when you add in the amount of the rehab.  You can assume they put a good $200-$250K into it.  There was a lot of foundation work to do and all the electrical, plumbing, etc is brand new.  Plus there are amazing custom details that were very expensive to do - so yeah, definitely a pricey house, but don’t think the owner is getting rich from it - he’s not.

  • Rusty04/16 07:20 PM

    “You can assume they put a good $200-$250K into it.  There was a lot of foundation work to do and all the electrical, plumbing, etc is brand new.”

    Sounds like a rather risky investment. Even at 40k to 90k in profit that’s 10-20% Return on investment in three years. They could do worse… I still wonder whether they’ll really be able to get that price.

  • Deb04/17 11:29 AM

    This is a great story, I love hearing about things like this. Just proves that it is possible to marry history with modernity.

    Rusty, other examples of similar investments are 702 and 704 E Hargett. I just saw posts on craigslist listing them at $335k and $435k respectively. The owners paid $90k and $130k for them in June 2006 and May 2007 respectively. I think both properties had been divided into apartments and were then renovated back to single family. I have a feeling they were both in not very good shape. I have no idea what a complete renovation would have cost for them, but without knowing that cost it does look like a huge windfall. There is no way of knowing without knowing the cost of renovation, though.

  • Spiro04/17 12:39 PM

    Deb:

    Would you please tell us how much profit constitutes a windfall.

    Next time I make a windfall I would like to know that I did.  I always know when I lose my shirt or do a project for practice (no profit), but I do not know how to tell when I have made a windfall.

    FYI, it is difficult and costly to convert apartments or duplexes back to single family, so it is unlikely that someone, in today’s market, would make an unusual profit doing it - if they do, GREAT!  By the way, the property is owned by an LLC that, I think, is managed by Mayor Meeker’s son.

  • Spiro04/17 12:42 PM

    Deb:

    I meant to specify that I was talking about the properties on Hargett Street, not the Cabarrus St. house.

  • Deb04/17 02:06 PM

    Spiro: Windfall may have been the wrong word to use, but I was referring to Rusty’s assumption of a ‘massive return on investment’.

    I was only trying to point out that it may APPEAR just from the numbers that are available to us that the owners are making a large profit. I never said that they ARE IN FACT making a large profit, and I was only trying to support Jess’s comment about the house on W Cabarrus with another example.

    We can only know the actual profit if we know all the numbers, and we don’t know all the numbers.

    I know that the Hargett houses probably did take a large investment (beyond the price of the property) to renovate them properly, and that the profit will probably not be “massive”. I also am aware of who owns them.

  • Rusty04/18 12:03 PM

    It would appear that “massive profit” was inaccurate, given Jess’s estimation of the work done on the house. Based solely on the GIS photo, I would have guessed that the house didn’t need a ton of structural work, but it’s hard to tell from such a photo… Hence my interest in additional before photos.

    I’ve never been a fan of the “windfall profit” phrase myself… It has an unnecessary tone of disdain towards making a good financial decision, even if by accident. Unless such a profit is made through some kind of deceit, why should we look at it so harshly?

  • Deb04/18 12:19 PM

    Rusty, I agree with you about the “windfall profit” terminology. I think that it has been looked at negatively in the house flipping context mainly because of all the media house flipping has gotten in the last few years. People watch flippers on TV (often ameteurs) slap a few coats of paint on and sometimes cut corners, and then call a place improved to make a large profit. This is obviously not representative of all real estate investors, but I think that it could be why some people look at these profits in a negative light without knowing the true amount of investment involved.

    I realize that people are taking a large risk by investing in and legitimately improving properties, especially historic properties. Something everyone should remember is that typically the return on investment is directly related to the amount of risk involved.

    I would also be interested in more before photos. My dream is to one day be able to renovate an historic house of my own to live in, not to sell. I am always curious about what it really takes to make it happen.

  • LW04/21 10:18 AM

    After watching the renovation take place over many months, I can safely say the profit margin on this place will not be massive. It was taken down to the framing, and probably received a bit of structural work underneath. I talked to the crew one day, and they said it would have been less expensive just to knock it down and rebuild, but that would have been a whole different battle with the historic district commission.
    It’s basically a new building.

    I just can’t believe they paid so much for it. It certainly wasn’t worth that much. But I’m glad they did as it was a prominently placed eyesore. Now if we can just get the house across the street fixed up the same way…

Welcome to New Raleigh. We welcome your participation in the ongoing discussion. Before posting we ask that you read our Comment Policy and we invite you to register with our site. If you want to keep up with the news on our blog, subscribe to the RSS feed or get emailed every time we post.




Remember my information for next time I comment

Send me an email of follow-up comments?