Hey all,

In my treks around St. Charles County, I've noticed what I'm sure everyone else has seen, the neighborhoods all look the same. And when I say that, I mean exactly the same. If I am in a friends house in St Charles, I know where the bathroom is going to be at my other friends house in Wentzville. If you drive in any neighborhood, I guarantee you'll see one of these 4 styles of homes or a variation of them.

1.) 


2.)

3.) 


4.) This is the single most common home I've come across around here. Double stairs, oversized master bedroom (or play area), etc.


These were all built around the same time, 97-03. 

I have a few questions for those who can answer.

1.) What took place in the St. Louis during the time in which all of these homes were built?
2.) Who built these? Are these McBride homes?
3.) Why are they all the same? Homes in Kansas City from the same era and surrounding towns are completely different than that of the ones here. No two seem alike in their floor plans, or at the very least, it's hard to find two that are. The interior finishes (crown molding, finished basements) seem to be the norm, whereas here they were optional at best. I may strike a nerve with this one, but the homes that were built here feel....cheap. What influenced the architectural decisions of KC homebuilders/buyers v.s. St. Louis County during that era?

In the city, typically you'll have only a handful of templates for houses that are spread around neighborhoods. My house has two identical templates right next to it, then the next 3 are the same template. Across the street, three houses in a row are the same template. It's not abnormal for home builders to use the same templates more than once.

My neighborhood was built in the 1930s.

Auggie wrote: ↑

Jan 05, 2025

In the city, typically you'll have only a handful of templates for houses that are spread around neighborhoods. My house has two identical templates right next to it, then the next 3 are the same template. Across the street, three houses in a row are the same template. It's not abnormal for home builders to use the same templates more than once.

My neighborhood was built in the 1930s.

Yeah I don't think this is not unique to st charles at all.  

Even in the city when it was rapidly expanding they didn't get an architect to make unique designs for every lot. Sure there are examples of unique designs like in compton heights or along lindell but working class neighborhoods have a lot of copy and paste. Then depending on the decade that the neighborhood was built, there would be a new style. More or less the same thing happens today in the suburbs. I've been to KC a few times but not in the suburbs so I don't know for sure but highly doubt that they did anything different.

I live on a street in Crestwood developed in the 50s where every house is the same design (some have the layout flipped like a mirror image). The only differences are whether they have a garage or carport and additions/changes made by owners over the years.

It's how you get "more house for your money."

The thing that boggles my mind about the suburbs here is all the siding. A house might have brick on the front but will have siding on the sides and back. And I am talking about houses north of $500K, not just "cheap" ones. (To be fair, I see this in other suburbs in the Midwest.) Is brick just that much more expensive? 

In Oklahoma City and in the Texas cities a builder would get killed for that. Newer homes (of the age represented in the photos above) have brick or stone on all 4 sides. That is the standard expectation. I had one builder tell me union labor here makes it more expensive to do that, I had another builder shrug and say "that's what people are used to in the suburbs here, the builders get away with it because that's what they expect." 

It just cheapens the look of a new subdivision so much. Especially when there are no fences and you can stand at a back window and just see box of siding next to box of siding next to box of siding. 

stlokc wrote: ↑

Jan 06, 2025

The thing that boggles my mind about the suburbs here is all the siding. A house might have brick on the front but will have siding on the sides and back. And I am talking about houses north of $500K, not just "cheap" ones. (To be fair, I see this in other suburbs in the Midwest.) Is brick just that much more expensive? 

In Oklahoma City and in the Texas cities a builder would get killed for that. Newer homes (of the age represented in the photos above) have brick or stone on all 4 sides. That is the standard expectation. I had one builder tell me union labor here makes it more expensive to do that, I had another builder shrug and say "that's what people are used to in the suburbs here, the builders get away with it because that's what they expect." 

It just cheapens the look of a new subdivision so much. Especially when there are no fences and you can stand at a back window and just see box of siding next to box of siding next to box of siding. 

Does the earthquake potential factor in at all?  Maybe even exterior brick has more of a tendency to crack versus siding?

Bart Harley Jarvis wrote: ↑

Jan 06, 2025

stlokc wrote: ↑

Jan 06, 2025

The thing that boggles my mind about the suburbs here is all the siding. A house might have brick on the front but will have siding on the sides and back. And I am talking about houses north of $500K, not just "cheap" ones. (To be fair, I see this in other suburbs in the Midwest.) Is brick just that much more expensive? 

In Oklahoma City and in the Texas cities a builder would get killed for that. Newer homes (of the age represented in the photos above) have brick or stone on all 4 sides. That is the standard expectation. I had one builder tell me union labor here makes it more expensive to do that, I had another builder shrug and say "that's what people are used to in the suburbs here, the builders get away with it because that's what they expect." 

It just cheapens the look of a new subdivision so much. Especially when there are no fences and you can stand at a back window and just see box of siding next to box of siding next to box of siding. 

Does the earthquake potential factor in at all?  Maybe even exterior brick has more of a tendency to crack versus siding?

No, it is purely a cost consideration