Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallysmom
Well -- each house style has it's own good points and looks good in it's style. I think what screws it up for me is when you take a house that is completely one style and decide it's going to be another..... like out here, people are buying Victorians and gutting them to be completely modern in the interior. It's like walking into the time warp.... jarring and wrong.
|
There is a huge difference between restoring and "renovating" One brings back the historic charm, the other makes a mess that appeals to almost no one. Something that so few people understand.
We meticulously restored an 1893 home in California. It took a lot of careful work. However people walked in and their mouths dropped open. "I did nto realize that there was anything like this in Southern California, this is amazing". The work was 905 done when we sold the house. It was trulely stunning. WE kept everything that there was that was original or even early remodeling and got rid of the awful modernizations and replaced them with period materials or reproductions. The guy who bought the house told us how he was impressed with what we had done and how he had restored many historical houses and been recognized for his restorations. He said that he would finish the house and make it into a classic example of how to restore, not renovate. He then proceeded to rip out almost every historical element and spent $250,000 doinf the following:
Cover the antique hardwood floors with engeineered floring materials.
Remove the classic light fixtures and reaplce them with Home depot crap.
Remove portions of the 16" sculpted baseboard moldins and replace them, or portions of them with 3' plain white plastic rectangular molding.
Rip out the period kitchen and try to turn it into something resembling a 1950s diner or a coca-cola commercial. Sure a 1950s diner looking kitchen would be neat in some places, but in an 1893 victorian house? Just plain silly.
Partially repaint the exterior using colors that do not work with the existing colors that were not painted over.
Tear off all of the appropriate period reproduction wall paper and paint the whole interior the same mustard yellow while framing each wall with hideous modern plastic moldings.
I do nto remember the rst of the rumuddling. He did some electrical work and installed a new roof that was necessary, but otherwise, he spent $250,000 eradicating every elment of history or charm form the house. He then tried to sell it at a $250,000 profit. The at a $100,000 profit. Then at break even, then at a slight loss. Eventually it sold for $350,000 less than he paid us for it. Part of that was the market, but a lot was the destruction of every bit of charm or history remaining in or returned to the house.
I really do not feel sorry for him at all. Some people need to be squeezed out of the "remodeling" or "restoration" business.
Anyway back to the OP.
THe only places that I remember seeing new houses that replicate orlder styles with any reasonable accuracy are some Habitat for Humanity houses in Santa Ana California, and some modern subdivision houses in a place called "New Pointe" in Beaufort South Carolina. There is also a pretty neat prairie style replica where we live, but it is an expensive custom home. Otherwise most attempts to replicate classic styles are disasters, usually the windows are one of the worst problems.
If you really like the style of older homes, and you are looking for a home to love rather than an investment, then get an actual historic house and restore it, or find one that is properly restored (or un-renovate and restore one that someone has remuddled). You will lose money on the effort, but it is nto about making money.