Living large is common on Connecticut’s Gold Coast, but Paul Chapman’s expansive dream home quickly became a nightmare for his neighbors.
“I’m surrounded by octogenarians who don’t want to see the neighborhood change in any way,” Chapman said. “I take it personally that they don’t like the style of my house.”
The 36-year-old computer engineer is at the center of a growing battle in the nation’s affluent suburbs, which are grappling with how much is too much when it comes to large new houses built on smaller properties in older neighborhoods.
“It goes on all over the country in select neighborhoods,” said Robert Lang, director of the Metropolitan Institute at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. “It’s reached a critical point.”
New Canaan, Greenwich and Westport are considering tougher zoning regulations that would reduce the size of new homes. Others, from nearby Ridgefield to the suburbs of Chicago and California, already have passed measures to curb the size of the homes, sometimes called “McMansions” and “starter castles.”
‘Ego Run Amok’
New residents are tearing down modestly sized houses built decades ago and constructing homes double and triple the size on small lots, sometimes casting their neighbors in perpetual shade.
Critics in smaller neighboring houses say the new houses loom over them, eliminating their privacy and destroying the character of the neighborhood.
“If I wanted darkness, I would move to Alaska,” said Cari Nizolek, 40, who lives next to Chapman. “You have three floors looking down on you.”
The trend, called “mansionization” by planners, is especially prevalent in wealthy towns with a hot real estate market and a ZIP code with cache. With little open space left, older neighborhoods close to mass transit and cultural activities are increasingly in demand.
“People want the neighborhood, but they don’t want the house,” Lang said. “There wasn’t that much of a premium to do it until recently.”
The average size of homes in the United States has grown steadily in the past two decades, from 1,785 square feet in 1985 to 2,340 square feet last year. About 21 percent of homes built last year were 3,000 square feet or larger, nearly double the number in 1988, according to the National Association of Home Builders.
Chapman, who is married and has a 2-year-old daughter, said he considered moving but loved the neighborhood where he can walk to the train and downtown. He concluded his 1,800-square-foot ranch could not handle the weight of an addition and that he would never be able to eliminate the mold that plagued his old home.
So Chapman tore down the house and built a 3,500-square-foot Colonial with a modern kitchen, a master suite, and two-car garage.
“I wanted an entryway where we could welcome people into the home,” Chapman said. “Having a foyer was a nice way to greet your neighbors.”
That seems unlikely for the foreseeable future. His neighbors started a petition to stop his construction and accuse him of everything from lacking taste to stealing their sunlight.
Nizolek, who has lived in her home for 14 years, said she quickly gathered dozens of signatures for a letter calling for relief from the new homes.
“Just when we think we have seen the finished frames of the monstrosity being put up next door, we are subject to multiple peaks, gables and protruding dormers,” Nizolek wrote. “Never again will the sun shine strongly in our windows at sunrise or sunset, as it has for us for 15, 20, 30 or even 40 years.”
Nizolek emphasized that the dispute is not personal. She said she understands young families need more space, but said the size of the new homes overwhelms the neighborhood.
Jim Creedon’s small ranch on the same street is dwarfed by new houses around him; his backyard is now a towering wall of house. He has nicknames for the houses: “The Wal-Mart,” “The Hilton.”
“It’s just kind of in your face,” Creedon said. “I just don’t look outside my backyard. I can’t help but think there is a lot of ego run amok because each house is larger than the last one.”
New Canaan zoning officials are planning to vote later this month on a series of proposals that include a height reduction and a slight reduction in the square footage of homes in some zones, said Hiram Peck, town planner.
Lang says there is room for compromise. The trend is not all bad because the newer homeowners are looking to live in established neighborhoods with shorter commutes, so that avoids more suburban sprawl, he said.
“If you push them out altogether, maybe someday you won’t be so fashionable,” Lang said.
But the new homeowners need to consider the neighborhood, Lang said. “Don’t make the house next door to it look like a doghouse,” he said.
Proponents say the larger homes increase the value of their smaller neighbors. But those who live in the smaller homes worry about being priced out as taxes jump.
Chapman’s neighborhood has plenty of retirees and was one of the last affordable places for residents to live in the area.
Phyllis Linden recently downsized into the neighborhood, saying the smaller house with one floor she bought was ideal for her ill husband. But the teardowns and newer homes have driven up the prices, leaving her fearful about her future.
“I hoped to stay here for the rest of my life,” Linden said. “There’s a lot of older women like me who don’t want a big house. It’s hard to find these little homes.” (AP)
