It’s interesting you’re proving your point by your own post being upvoted right now.
The initial number of 42% isn’t that far off of reality. My own garage/shop is 36% right now. And I will at some point add onto it. Right now it is 25’x32’ and I would like another 20’ on it. Then it would be 25’x52’ and 48%. And I live right in town, on a regular 1/4 acre lot.
There are defintely houses in Wisconsin here that are at 60%. I can go on realtor.com right now and find properties with large pole sheds and garage spaces that account for 60%.
I don’t see any claims of majority, just that it can happen. And it definitely does, unless you don’t consider steel frame buildings and pole sheds, but why wouldn’t you? Here is one example, and another example, and another example, but I could find plenty of others. Just go on realtor.com search Wisconsin and set garage spaces to 3+ and maximum home size to 2250 sq feet and you will see plenty of examples of 60% and even greater.
Another one.Another one. Okay. I’m done now because I’m starting to get garage envy looking at some of these.
unless you don’t consider steel frame buildings and pole sheds, but why wouldn’t you?
You do not, in fact, count those buildings towards your houses square footage. Doing so would open yourself up to all sorts of liability.
Covered, enclosed porches can only be included if heated and using the same system as the rest of the house.
Garages, pool houses, guest houses, or any rooms that require you to leave the finished area of the main house to gain access are not counted in the square footage of a house. source
The only common situations in which the exact size of a home may be legally important would be:
For tax appraisal purposes
For qualifying for a certain mortgage or home equity loan
If a buyer has already bought, or at least has signed a contract on a home, and now claims that fraud was committed because the home is not as large as advertised. source
For further considerations of those that are interested (ANSI Draft, figure 1, page 6, outside source as the real ansi website is just atrocious to navigate and I’m not gonna dox myself by loading up local code.)
As shown, the upper-level plan has an open foyer and a protruding window that does not extend to the floor; neither area contributes to the square footage of the upper level. The calculated finished square footage of the entry level does not include the protruding fireplace, covered patio, garage, or unfinished laundry. The finished area of the basement is counted toward the below- grade finished square footage in its entirety, including the area under the stairs that descend from the entry level. The area of the unfinished utility room is calculated by using the method prescribed in the standard but is not included in the below-grade finished square footage.
All that aside, you’re slapping a 25’x52’ shed onto your 1/4 acre property? That’s almost 20% of your land use not including lot encroachment setback, drainage, and basic driveway/building infrastructure. It’s your property so definitely do as you wish, but to think this is a common practice or a desirable thing outside of niche hobbyists or being used for work related activities/storage is nonsense. Neighborhood flooding, no natural green spaces for habitats, it all sounds like a horrible dystopia on your mini-compound.
You do not, in fact, count those buildings towards your houses square footage. Doing so would open yourself up to all sorts of liability.
You don’t count garage spaces as square footage of a house either, so what is your point? If he’s comparing garage space footage to living quarter footage, then you should also include pole sheds into that equation. Fucking think about it… use the context of this conversation, and attempt to apply a little critical thinking.
All that aside, you’re slapping a 25’x52’ shed onto your 1/4 acre property? That’s almost 20% of your land use not including lot encroachment setback, drainage, and basic driveway/building infrastructure. It’s your property so definitely do as you wish, but to think this is a common practice or a desirable thing outside of niche hobbyists or being used for work related activities/storage is nonsense.
No, not adding a shed, extending my garage/shop. It has steel siding, nice windows, fully insulated 6 inch walls finished with osb on the inside, ceiling with tons of lighting, a ceiling mounted hot dawg furnace that takes it from 20F to 60F in literally 10 minutes, and perfect concrete with a drain.
Neighborhood flooding, no natural green spaces for habitats, it all sounds like a horrible dystopia on your mini-compound.
A lot of people use their garages for other things than just storing vehicles. Feel free to take a look at my YouTube videos to see how nice my garage/shop is setup now. And how nice my fenced in backyard looks, and how the garage doesn’t take away from it, nor would adding the 20’ onto the back of it. And how nicely this and my house all sit on this property. Then you can stop talking out of your ass, thanks buddy! Again, this OP has really been proving his point in a roundabout way, a lot of people in here like you talking out of their asses and getting upvotes.
Nice to see you showing your ass on a pedantic post like this.
outside of niche hobbyists or being used for work related activities/storage is nonsense
oh look, you fit the exact description I referred to! The context of this conversation is about a mass land development, try to fucking think about it.
No, not adding a shed, extending my garage/shop… perfect concrete with a drain.
perfect concrete?.. you do know a drain has to lead somewhere right? Into the surrounding area which if it was all developed like you’ve done would cause problems. “Slapping” refers to adding on or new but I see I hit a nerve talking about your “bestest shed”. Would be interesting to see the videos but I try not to support creators who are assholes and your descriptive reply does nothing for the conversation. Again, you’re helping prove the point that a few anecdotal observations isn’t the norm or recommended but seems to get upvotes. Continue arguing on though, love to see the hot gas pouring out of more than a hawt dog furnace.
Into the surrounding area which if it was all developed like you’ve done would cause problems.
You just can’t help but talk out of your ass about things you know nothing about, huh? Have you ever heard of a dry well or a catch basin? And nothing but snow melt goes down into it anyway. What is with people that quite obviously have no experience on a topic talking so confidently out of their asses? It is the Dunning-Kruger effect on full display with you. Just stop embarrassing yourself.
The context of this conversation is about a mass land development, try to fucking think about it.
No, the context of this post is about upvoting incorrect information, and downvoting correct information.
Again, you’re helping prove the point that a few anecdotal observations isn’t the norm
And you’re again proving the point that you have horrible reading comprehension. No one made the claim that it is the norm, the claim was, “Sometimes, the garage is more than 60% of the whole house.” And that is absolutely true.
You’re really latching onto that sometimes bit hard aren’t you?
the context of this post is about upvoting incorrect information, and downvoting correct information.
…information about… come on… you almost got it. I’m glad you learned about catch basins, unfortunate that you believe it negates any water run-off. You do have an outlet from the basin right? Is this a magical abyss of a basin that catches all the run off from your 3k sq ft structures and you think it’ll never fill up?
I see you’re already engaging with the OP and admitted to having horrible reading comprehension since you couldn’t discern the original intent of the post. But then you continue on with the SoMEtIMEs!! rhetoric. As you’ve stated, you’re a niche land owner who is ACTIVELY adding on to an already oversized shed, your land wasn’t originally developed that way nor is that a practice that’s done without an active home owner who has stated those needs to the builders. No one is going around developing 60%, sOmETiMeS! people add on as is their right after purchasing. Love your use of picking and choosing through the argument, truly impressive.
You’ve proven yourself to be a know-nothing blowhard over and over by now… so it should come as no surprise when I tell you this, but… I think you’re a fool, and I don’t consider your opinion whatsoever. Honestly, you should probably get some help based on how adamantly you refuse to admit wrong when it’s been quite obvious. Might be some underlying issues there. In any event, stay mad about being called out or learn from this, grow, and be happy. I have better things to do than argue with a confidently wrong blowhard that is continually arguing tangents to delay the inevitable of facing reality and admitting they are wrong. You’ve embarrassed yourself enough, you’ve wasted enough of my time. Deuces!
Be still my heart, apparently it matters because you’ve lost all words and have gone the typical route of insults. I hope that’s how you learn and are happy, to think you actually had any factual knowledge to have a conversation with is my fault. This replies screams of something you’re dying to tell yourself in a mirror, you’re not even pointing out what I need to admit to so I’m assuming it’s a message to yourself. Have fun crying in your shed and make sure to clean your basin often, you can think of me next time you’re out there.
Excellent point. The initial intent of my squabble wasn’t trying to deny that counter-examples exist, just that when comparing 100 houses to 100 apartments, that there seemed to be losses in living space for the apartment (law of averages and whatnot).
I had made another comment on that /c/FuckCars thread that calculated that if all of the homes had 1-car garages (which is not uncommon for a lot of dense low-density suburbs), then the homes would be 1740 SqFt with the garage / 1500 SqFt Livable, and the apartments would be 1009 SqFt livable. So a 33% loss of livable space in the image with what I would consider a reasonable assumption.
Fair enough, but that is not discernible from the post. You’re highlighting what they are saying, and all they are saying is, “Sometimes, the garage is more than 60% of the whole house.” And you are implying with this post that it is factually incorrect, when it is in fact true.
It’s interesting you’re proving your point by your own post being upvoted right now.
The initial number of 42% isn’t that far off of reality. My own garage/shop is 36% right now. And I will at some point add onto it. Right now it is 25’x32’ and I would like another 20’ on it. Then it would be 25’x52’ and 48%. And I live right in town, on a regular 1/4 acre lot.
There are defintely houses in Wisconsin here that are at 60%. I can go on realtor.com right now and find properties with large pole sheds and garage spaces that account for 60%.
I don’t see any claims of majority, just that it can happen. And it definitely does, unless you don’t consider steel frame buildings and pole sheds, but why wouldn’t you? Here is one example, and another example, and another example, but I could find plenty of others. Just go on realtor.com search Wisconsin and set garage spaces to 3+ and maximum home size to 2250 sq feet and you will see plenty of examples of 60% and even greater.
Another one. Another one. Okay. I’m done now because I’m starting to get garage envy looking at some of these.
I don’t know if I’m supposed to upvote you because I like your comment or downvote you for being right.
Use one instance for the upvote, and one instance for the downvote, and then tell everyone Drew Carrie was right, the points don’t matter.
They never mattered. Mostly.
Also, I wish votes weren’t a thing. I think they miss the point.
You do not, in fact, count those buildings towards your houses square footage. Doing so would open yourself up to all sorts of liability.
For further considerations of those that are interested (ANSI Draft, figure 1, page 6, outside source as the real ansi website is just atrocious to navigate and I’m not gonna dox myself by loading up local code.)
All that aside, you’re slapping a 25’x52’ shed onto your 1/4 acre property? That’s almost 20% of your land use not including lot encroachment setback, drainage, and basic driveway/building infrastructure. It’s your property so definitely do as you wish, but to think this is a common practice or a desirable thing outside of niche hobbyists or being used for work related activities/storage is nonsense. Neighborhood flooding, no natural green spaces for habitats, it all sounds like a horrible dystopia on your mini-compound.
You don’t count garage spaces as square footage of a house either, so what is your point? If he’s comparing garage space footage to living quarter footage, then you should also include pole sheds into that equation. Fucking think about it… use the context of this conversation, and attempt to apply a little critical thinking.
No, not adding a shed, extending my garage/shop. It has steel siding, nice windows, fully insulated 6 inch walls finished with osb on the inside, ceiling with tons of lighting, a ceiling mounted hot dawg furnace that takes it from 20F to 60F in literally 10 minutes, and perfect concrete with a drain.
A lot of people use their garages for other things than just storing vehicles. Feel free to take a look at my YouTube videos to see how nice my garage/shop is setup now. And how nice my fenced in backyard looks, and how the garage doesn’t take away from it, nor would adding the 20’ onto the back of it. And how nicely this and my house all sit on this property. Then you can stop talking out of your ass, thanks buddy! Again, this OP has really been proving his point in a roundabout way, a lot of people in here like you talking out of their asses and getting upvotes.
Nice to see you showing your ass on a pedantic post like this.
oh look, you fit the exact description I referred to! The context of this conversation is about a mass land development, try to fucking think about it.
perfect concrete?.. you do know a drain has to lead somewhere right? Into the surrounding area which if it was all developed like you’ve done would cause problems. “Slapping” refers to adding on or new but I see I hit a nerve talking about your “bestest shed”. Would be interesting to see the videos but I try not to support creators who are assholes and your descriptive reply does nothing for the conversation. Again, you’re helping prove the point that a few anecdotal observations isn’t the norm or recommended but seems to get upvotes. Continue arguing on though, love to see the hot gas pouring out of more than a hawt dog furnace.
deleted by creator
You just can’t help but talk out of your ass about things you know nothing about, huh? Have you ever heard of a dry well or a catch basin? And nothing but snow melt goes down into it anyway. What is with people that quite obviously have no experience on a topic talking so confidently out of their asses? It is the Dunning-Kruger effect on full display with you. Just stop embarrassing yourself.
No, the context of this post is about upvoting incorrect information, and downvoting correct information.
And you’re again proving the point that you have horrible reading comprehension. No one made the claim that it is the norm, the claim was, “Sometimes, the garage is more than 60% of the whole house.” And that is absolutely true.
You’re really latching onto that sometimes bit hard aren’t you?
…information about… come on… you almost got it. I’m glad you learned about catch basins, unfortunate that you believe it negates any water run-off. You do have an outlet from the basin right? Is this a magical abyss of a basin that catches all the run off from your 3k sq ft structures and you think it’ll never fill up?
I see you’re already engaging with the OP and admitted to having horrible reading comprehension since you couldn’t discern the original intent of the post. But then you continue on with the SoMEtIMEs!! rhetoric. As you’ve stated, you’re a niche land owner who is ACTIVELY adding on to an already oversized shed, your land wasn’t originally developed that way nor is that a practice that’s done without an active home owner who has stated those needs to the builders. No one is going around developing 60%, sOmETiMeS! people add on as is their right after purchasing. Love your use of picking and choosing through the argument, truly impressive.
You’ve proven yourself to be a know-nothing blowhard over and over by now… so it should come as no surprise when I tell you this, but… I think you’re a fool, and I don’t consider your opinion whatsoever. Honestly, you should probably get some help based on how adamantly you refuse to admit wrong when it’s been quite obvious. Might be some underlying issues there. In any event, stay mad about being called out or learn from this, grow, and be happy. I have better things to do than argue with a confidently wrong blowhard that is continually arguing tangents to delay the inevitable of facing reality and admitting they are wrong. You’ve embarrassed yourself enough, you’ve wasted enough of my time. Deuces!
Be still my heart, apparently it matters because you’ve lost all words and have gone the typical route of insults. I hope that’s how you learn and are happy, to think you actually had any factual knowledge to have a conversation with is my fault. This replies screams of something you’re dying to tell yourself in a mirror, you’re not even pointing out what I need to admit to so I’m assuming it’s a message to yourself. Have fun crying in your shed and make sure to clean your basin often, you can think of me next time you’re out there.
Bye Felicia!
deleted by creator
Excellent point. The initial intent of my squabble wasn’t trying to deny that counter-examples exist, just that when comparing 100 houses to 100 apartments, that there seemed to be losses in living space for the apartment (law of averages and whatnot).
I had made another comment on that /c/FuckCars thread that calculated that if all of the homes had 1-car garages (which is not uncommon for a lot of dense low-density suburbs), then the homes would be 1740 SqFt with the garage / 1500 SqFt Livable, and the apartments would be 1009 SqFt livable. So a 33% loss of livable space in the image with what I would consider a reasonable assumption.
Fair enough, but that is not discernible from the post. You’re highlighting what they are saying, and all they are saying is, “Sometimes, the garage is more than 60% of the whole house.” And you are implying with this post that it is factually incorrect, when it is in fact true.