It seems that old houses, say that were built before 1940, unless they have some unique historical value, are not worthy of a major investment to remodel. They have just too many potential flaws or "functional obsolesence" (ie outdated building techniques, outdated layout, too inefficient, etc).
Perhaps it might be worth it to take it down to the studs and rebuilt to ensure that it's built to modern standards. But best thing is to build a brand spankin new house.
This kind of makes me sad because there is a ton of old housing stock in America. But when I really analyze it (I spend a lot of time browsing old houses), I just get overwhelmed with all the potential flaws and inefficiencies that would need corrected. I can see why some just get abonded as they become to costly to maintain. (what if the drains collapse? need a new roof/windows/gutters/etc)
[link] [comments]
source https://www.reddit.com/r/RealEstate/comments/l9txug/basic_old_houses_seem_not_worth_must_investment/
Comments
Post a Comment