Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
New home vs. historic home
As we begin to look at homes (both single family homes in the burbs and flats in the city - we live in a major metropolitan area), I find myself torn between whether we should look at new properties or older properties. If we were looking in a less expensive market, it would be a no-brainer to me: I love historic homes and would love to buy one that we could make 'our own' through repairs, etc. But since our area is quite expensive, I'm tempted to go with a newer home because I assume there are less costs associated with the home (even though I generally don't like newer homes).
Has anyone had a positive or negative experience with either a new or a historic home? When I say historic, I'd like something built prior to the 1950's. There are lots of homes this age in our area.
Any thoughts?
Re: New home vs. historic home
We've had both newer and older homes. I much prefer the older ones. They feel solid and are built well. On the down side, if the systems (electrical, plumbing) have not been upgraded, you are facing major expense. You might also have to redo kitchen and baths, but you will probably know that going in. On the other hand, with a brand-new home, you will probably have to do major landscaping, and that gets very expensive, too.
Both new and old homes will have unexpected problems. One of our newer homes split a pipe in the middle of the night and flooded the kitchen and dining room. One of our older homes developed a leak in a pipe that stained the brand-new kitchen ceiling. That's home-ownership for you!
Older homes tend to be in established neighborhoods, with amenities nearby. Newer neighborhoods often don't have a predictable character.
Finally, when it comes to resale, a few years down the road, your older home will be even older, and more valuable to people looking for older homes. Your new home will just be a used home -- not attractive to people looking for either new or older homes.
Wow...that's an incredible good point that I hadn't thought of!
Read this.
Moral of the story: actual age isn't as important as relative age.
My Pinterest
The Googlesites Paint Bio
Thinking of doing cosmetic updates to a dated home? These were our costs.
Yeah, I wouldn't be looking at homes that are about 25 years old...I'm talking 60+, historic homes.
For some reason, I'm really averse to a 70's, 80's or 90's homes.
Right, but the point is the same: you need to be carefully examining the age of all components of any older house. Did you read the whole thread? 60+ just means that it could be due for another complete redo if redo's are theoretically done every 25 years.
My Pinterest
The Googlesites Paint Bio
Thinking of doing cosmetic updates to a dated home? These were our costs.
Yes I did read the whole thread. She says "And I know this doesn't compare to a really old house, but in some ways, if an old house has been taken care of, I think that'd be a better house." I totally get what you mean. I wouldn't buy a home that hadn't recently gotten a new roof, a/c and furnace, insulation, and probably gutter system. If I were living in an area where a fixer-upper was much less expensive, I'd be up for doing the reno work myself, but in my current situation, I'd be looking at buying an already-updated historic home.
Location. You can still get some really good deals in the city as it is still in a decline. There are some amazing turn of the century homes through out, but the heights and highlands will increase in value more. Same with downtown for a home. Tosa is a great option too. I think the condo market down there is still bad and you will have a hard time financing it. With older homes you will have a lot more upkeep, but it can be fun too.
For a good deal on a newer home you will really need to go out past the lake country area or south. The closer suburbs are still getting good money for a new home. These are sometimes harder to sell because of the location, but if you are looking to stay for the next 10-20 years don't worry about resale. Look for what you want to live in.
For a mid century home you will still have good value and future value in the burbs like brookfield, elm grove, germantown. You want to have a home in a great school district and selling is not much of a problem.
We thought we wanted a pre-WWII home, but honestly they just didn't fit our lifestyle. We like to entertain, and the floorplans were all wrong. We like to hang out all together, and the rooms just felt cramped. And I need a master suite. Finding an older home that had a master suite with a decent sized bathroom was next to impossible. I'm all for character, but older homes just didn't fit us. We ended up with a classic center foyer colonial that was built in the 1980s. It's not the crappy newer construction quality that we were afraid of, but it was built with a more modern family in mind.
I haven't owned a historic home myself, but I had a long term relationship with an ex who grew up in a "historic" home that his parents still lived in. He talked about how expensive it was to upkeep (not just to remodel, just things you had to do all the time) and how much work it was...he was worried his parents weren't going to be able to keep in up now that they were getting older.
This forum as a lot of good points:
https://www.wesabe.com/groups/14-buying-a-house/discussions/2447-is-it-worth-it-to-buy-an-old-house
Generally speaking, if you buy an old home, you will be spending more time and more money fixing it & upkeeping than if you were to buy a new home. That isn't to say you won't spend any time & money on a new home as well, but in all likelihood not nearly as much. It also seems like the problems older homes have (foundation, rotting beams, old windows) seem to be more serious & harder to fix.
Just my opinion from what I've heard/seen. I'd never own a home old enough to be considered historic, but that's just me. Plenty people do & the extra work is worth it to them. I think that my house (built in 2006) is enough work as it is, and it has very few problems!
Thanks for your input! I actually used to live in both the MKE and Madison areas buf we live in Chicago now!
omg! I love the glasses on the baby! Sorry to be off topic.
We're currently deciding between two birck homes, safe area, good schools and two other unique homes, one of which is in a historic district and needs repairs... Good thread everyone.