Which Costs More… a Bungalow or a Tudor?
Because I’ve been selling in this neighborhood for almost 12 years, I have a pretty good handle on what buyers like and will be willing to pay more for. Bungalows and Tudors are by far the most popular floorplans and if well-maintained, command top dollar, especially if their vintage features have been preserved. 1950’s ranches are less appealing, as are turn-of-the-century cottage-style homes, for various reasons. But how MUCH less appealing?
So, I’m doing a fun little analysis this morning. I’m comparing the average price per square foot (psf) and the average and high/low sales prices of each vintage. For example, I just ran a search on my MLS for ranch-style brick homes built between 1920 and 1930 (i.e. the Bungalow), with square footages of between 900 and 1100. Came up with 46 Bungalows with an average psf of $322, a high price of $419,000 and a low price of $220,000.
Did the same thing with Tudors built in the 1930’s. Surprisingly, the results were almost identical - $322 average psf, high: $415k; low: $235k. Why am I surprised? Because I’ve always thought that Tudors commanded a higher price due to their more elaborate architectural detailing. They always seem to, anyway. Interesting to find out that statistically, they’re no more or no less appealing than Bungalows.
I kept going – analyzing the stats for 1900-1910 cottages and 1945-1960’s ranches. In case you’re interested, cottages command a much lower psf than Bungalows or Tudors and 50’s ranches are somewhere in between.
Good to know. I’m not sure how I’ll use this knowledge (outside of writing a blog about it), but I’ll betcha’ it comes in handy sometime soon!
