Why Everyone Is Moving To Leawood Kansas | Is Leawood The Best Suburb in Johnson County?

[@kcsuburbs]

Buying, Selling, or Building a Home in Kansas City? 📲Call or Text: 🧑‍💻Email: [e-mail]

[@richardnichols3949]

Very informative. Thank you.

[@brockreynolds870]

One of the biggest problems with them tearing down homes in leawood, and building new ones, is that the mature 60-70 year old trees that they try to "Save" end up going into decline, because of all the root disturbance from the new construction. That house at 8416 Ensley Lane is a perfect example of that. They tried to save the large oak tree in front by the driveway, but scraping around it endslessly with a bobcat, and pouring new concrete driveway all next to it's root zone, it's now struggling, and will most certainly die in the next 3-5 years. Then of course, you have to pay 5,000$ to have the tree cut down..... and you'll never have a tree that tall until you plant a new one, and then wait 30 years. If they just leave the old house and REMODEL, this kind of thing tends not to happen. It can also cause tredpidation with buyers who want to live in these neighbrohoods, because you never know when a developer is going to tear down a 2,500 square foot home next door to you, and put up a 7,000 square foot McMansion that is entirely too large for the lot. This is something that homeowners in Leawood never had to be conerned about 20 years ago.

[@kcsuburbs]

Total shame to see big trees taken down or impacted by development! Big, mature trees are one of the most popular requests I get from clients. Most people seem to remodel when possible (certainly not all). With the frontage of some of those lots in Leawood, those 2,500 sqft homes simply aren't the highest and best use of the land. That's before considering outdated floor plans and the cost of structural changes. I'm unsure what the middle ground is in the old vs new debate. Maybe larger setbacks, building height/size restrictions, etc would solve those concerns...it's a controversy either way.

[@brockreynolds870]

@@kcsuburbs I always pose the question.. when it comes to "outdated floor plans", will the new homes being built now be torn down in 40 years because their floor plans are outdated? I'm always of the opinion to work with what you've got.... or just do a modeate remodel. If you want an 8,000 squre foot house, go to Hallbrook.

[@kcsuburbs]

​@@brockreynolds870 Some? Probably. We've all seen properties that need to be torn down--when the cost to revive them exceeds the value of the finished product. Is that true of ALL properties that people tear down? No, but a pretty good number. They're working with what they've got--a valuable piece of land and a structure that doesn't maximize it's value. I understand the premise of your first comment. It's a shame to see mature, 50+ year old trees become collateral damage to new development. However, this is a complex problem with several points to be made on both sides and I'm not sure what an ideal solution looks like. Banning new construction or limiting what homeowners do with their property (beyond what city code currently regulates) doesn't seem likely or plausible.

[@brockreynolds870]

@@kcsuburbs It's hard to know how to handle it... to me, some of these (not all) new construction homes I see in Prairie Village, for instance, are so much bigger than surrounding homes, it's looks just as ridiculous as dropping an 1,100 square foot home in the middle of Hallbrook. Perhaps there needs to be limits on new construction size when it's in an aleady exisitng neighborhood, as opposed to a brand new development. Something like restricting the new construction to double the square footage of the original home that was on the lot? Or not having a square footage restriction if the lot is 1 acre or larger (Such as some of the homes on Lee) Fact remains that 8416 Ensley Lane is a 9,000 square foot home with a 1,900 square foot home on one side, and a 2,700 square foot home on the other.

[@brockreynolds870]

If you're gonna live in Leawood, live in the portion NORTH of 435.

[@riggs20]

Why exactly? I ask because I’ve been looking at some lovely homes that are quite a bit south of that.

[@brockreynolds870]

@@riggs20 Older homes, better quality construction... bigger sized lots many times, farther south you go, you have smaller lots in relation to the size of the house, and the new developments out south have HORRIBLE soil, because in the last 25 years, builders scrape the tospil off the lot, sell it, excavate for the house, and just smear the clay subsoil and rocks over the top of everything, and plunk down sod. Unless the homeowner paid extra to have new topsoil brought back IN, and put over the top of the grade. The trees, flowers, and landscaping look more lush north of 435, not just because they are older, it's because the topsoil wasn't destroyed when they built the house. That's why you see Azaleas and fully mature dogwoods much more often there, because they require better soil conditions and just struggle in heavy clay and rock. It's not SO much geography, as build date. If the house was built before 1985, you'll be in better shape. I've done work at homes in south Leawood that are 15 years old, with dry rot in the exterior window frames.

[@riggs20]

@@brockreynolds870Wow, thanks for the insight. I’ll keep that in mind when I’m looking. I tend to like the newer builds because I want ceilings higher than 8 feet. But the land itself is important as well!

[@brockreynolds870]

@@riggs20 There are lots of older homes with vaulted ceilings in Leawood. Especially the sprawling, 60's ranches. One of my best clients has a 1963 ranch that was just remodeled, and it had an original vaulted ceiling on the main family room. She hates the newer designs because she wants a useable front porch.. and she said that most all the newer homes have these big, grand entrances that serve absolutely no purpose.

[@riggs20]

@@brockreynolds870 Yes, I love the vaulted ceilings! The only gripe I have about houses built from let’s say the 1940s-1980s is they tend to have lower ceilings, especially in the kitchens. A lot of the kitchens have those drop, “plasticky” ceilings that are maybe 7 feet and I just hate those. But, like you mentioned in a previous post, there is something to be said for remodeling vs building new. I, too, love the porches. It would be hard to find high ceilings and porches unless you start going way back, like 1920s homes and earlier. I don’t know if the KC suburbs have many homes that old. I’d probably have to start looking in the city, and of course price points skyrocket the closer in you are.